Down with Walker! on the Peoria.com Forums

Recall vote tomorrow.

Says the old proverb, Two wrongs don't make a right. A wrongful action isn't moral justification to commit an equally wrong action and revoke the rights of others.

When immoral things are done without repercussions, it sets a precedent. If a Republican can justify revoking Basic Human rights over budget issues, will the next Republican revoke our right to be secure in our homes, and place a government agent in every home to prevent Domestic violence, or shake us down to prevent Terrorism or other equally distasteful criminal activity?

Not that I am a fan of Walker by any means... but I think the electorate could have waited until the next regular scheduled election to vote him out. Of course he will probably be taken out by the federal prosecutor before then...

I don't like his tactics but at least he has the stones to do SOMETHING. Meanwhile, our elected officials in the great state of Illinois do nothing except raise our taxes, revenue which is quickly spent so they raise more taxes. F that. I have no need for collective bargaining, and I feel very little sympathy for public sector employees in general.

I don't understand why public sector employees deserve anything different than any working person in the private sector.

I'm not sure if that's directed at me or not, but in general, public sector employees have long enjoyed more and better benefits for many, many, many years than their private sector counterparts. When I was a kid, everybody joked that they wanted to grow up and get a government job so they could do next to nothing and get paid handsomely for it. Well, it was a joke, but it really wasn't.

Unless he is convicted of a crime, which he may be indicted soon, then I see no need for a recall. I disagree with his actions and policies but if we can recall anyone that we disagree with then there will be no governing...just recalls and no courage to do anything even slightly controversial.

Unfortunately, those stones weren't helpful in making a sound decision.

If the tax payers don't want to pay for the services they demand, then do away with the services. You either pay for it, or you go without.

And some people have no need to arm themselves, does that mean we do away with the right to bare arms?

Wow, Violation of Basic Human rights doesn't fall high on your list these days?

Believe me...I am not going to defend Walker. If anyone feels their human rights were violated then they can adress that in the court system. My point is that there are some hard decisions that are going to have to be made over the next few years (entitlement programs) and if those that feel infringed upon can just recall people then no one will have the cajones to make the hard decisions.

There is a huge difference between Entitlement programs and Violation of Human rights.

I didn't compare the two.

You quoted my concern in regards to Human rights violations and then mentioned Entitlements. I assumed you were comparing the two.

Whatever hypothetical problems arise with entitlement programs in the future, that doesn't mean we allow politicians to ax away basic rights.

Pock you are misguided on making this a "basic human rights" issue. I'm thinking you consider the right to assemble a basic human right, is that correct?
What about the right not to assemble if you don't want to?
What is really chaffing the unions *** is that Walker made public sector union dues *optional*.
As a result, approx. 2/3 of the membership opted out.
They instead decided to put those union dues right back in their pocket.
So if you say have the right to assemble, I would hope you would equally support their right to not assemble, and just be happy for them that they have more of their money to take home and feed their families.
Your position on this doesn't seem to fit your other commonly held belief as to limited government.
Walker will win.
Wisconsin will be in play for November.

When the public workers union was prohibited by law from being able to collectively bargain for wages, benefits and working condition, there is no longer any use for the union. So Walker succeeded in making the state employees more like indentured servants.

Had the dues been made optional, without restricting bargaining rights, the union membership probably wouldn't have changed much.

I was talking about politicians being brave enough to make tough decisions. If the threat of recall looms constantly there will not be any tough decisions made.

The right to collectively bargain is recognized through international human rights conventions. I'm not misguided. It is what it is.

Are they being forced to work in Unions? I thought employment was voluntary? Wasn't it Republicans on this forum that pointed out on a similar topic on employment, if you wanted Birth Control covered in your employer's insurance, don't work for the catholic Church? Isn't what's good for the goose is good for the gander? If you don't want to participate in a Union, don't pursue employment in a Union job. Simple as that.

Sure it Does. Republics exist to secure and protect pre-existing rights, this is simply utilizing the limited Government I often speak of.

The actions by Walker are far more dangerous than the budget concerns he used to justify the action. Once apon a time, as a society we had people who worked for whatever little they were given, and had no voice in it.. Fortunately, we've moved past slavery. People have a voice. It isn't the duty of government to limit that voice.