Jump to content



Photo
- - - - -

While I was at Vibes....


  • Please log in to reply
698 replies to this topic

#601 Joker

Joker
  • VibeTribe
  • 11,737 posts

Posted 24 September 2013 - 07:46 PM

Show me one example - just one - of when you originally said the citizen was right and the cop was wrong.

I try to take a look at both sides and review what's known before labeling either side right or wrong. I can't recall any specific incident offhand but I've repeatedly said any cop guilty of wrongdoing should be held accountable for his actions. I stand by that and I acknowledge that there are bad cops out there.



#602 Joker

Joker
  • VibeTribe
  • 11,737 posts

Posted 24 September 2013 - 07:48 PM

Putting this here where it's easier to find

 

http://www.ustream.t...m_medium=social



#603 JBetty

JBetty
  • VibeTribe
  • 21,158 posts

Posted 24 September 2013 - 08:07 PM

I try to take a look at both sides and review what's known before labeling either side right or wrong. I can't recall any specific incident offhand but I've repeatedly said any cop guilty of wrongdoing should be held accountable for his actions. I stand by that and I acknowledge that there are bad cops out there.

 

 

 

Yes, I see you say that time and again, but that's not my point.

My point is that you'll always take the cops' side first.

I asked for one example of where you took the citizens' side first, because I don't think you ever have.

 

At any rate, I haven't had time to tune into the daily shenanigans recently, but my understanding from singers in the know is that all is fairly quiet on the midwestern front.



#604 JBetty

JBetty
  • VibeTribe
  • 21,158 posts

Posted 24 September 2013 - 08:10 PM

Putting this here where it's easier to find

 

http://www.ustream.t...m_medium=social

 

 

I'm adding this to my OP so it'll still be easier to find further on down the road.



#605 Joker

Joker
  • VibeTribe
  • 11,737 posts

Posted 24 September 2013 - 08:21 PM

Yes, I see you say that time and again, but that's not my point.

My point is that you'll always take the cops' side first.

I asked for one example of where you took the citizens' side first, because I don't think you ever have.

 

At any rate, I haven't had time to tune into the daily shenanigans recently, but my understanding from singers in the know is that all is fairly quiet on the midwestern front.

You're probably right, because like I said, I try not to just jump in and take one side first without trying to see both sides. While the vast majority of people will automatically blame the law enforcement side no matter what.

 

I think the singers are outside again tomorrow because the Republican Women's Front of Judea has a permit.



#606 Depends

Depends
  • VibeTribe
  • 12,517 posts

Posted 25 September 2013 - 02:26 AM

Oh it was low and that's probably why the judge made it 20.

Yes it was low.  And even 20 might be low.  But, IMO, the gov didn't mask his intentions one little bit by making that number 4.

 

And if I am not incorrect, at the time that "4" rule was put in place, the number of singers was actually closer to 4 on a daily basis, than 20.  I am not sure about this number, but I seem to remember something like that.

 

I am a person who does not believe in coincidences.  IMO, the gov didn't wake up one morning and say, "No more than 4!", and "Oh, I hadn't noticed there are people signing in the building, isn't that nice."

 

IMO, he was intending to squash dissent.  



#607 JBetty

JBetty
  • VibeTribe
  • 21,158 posts

Posted 26 September 2013 - 12:55 PM

IMO, he was intending to squash dissent.  

 

 

There's no doubt about that.

Seems like he's smartened up a bit by not having singers arrested anymore, which just drew more attention and sympathy to their cause, Joker notwithstanding.  



#608 Joker

Joker
  • VibeTribe
  • 11,737 posts

Posted 26 September 2013 - 03:08 PM

One could certainly argue his intent was to squash dissent and one could just as easily argue his intent was to make sure everyone has a fair chance to use of the rotunda. The permit rule has been on the books for over 30 years, it's not something created just for these protests. Again, he's not telling them they can't protest or voice their dissent, they can still do that.  

 

We've seen that these protesters are willing to lie about being part of the group in an effort to skirt the rules that are in place. One could also argue that THAT is part of the reason why he tried to limit the size to four. 

 

 

And what is their cause again? Oh yeah, despite the fact that Walker won the initial election AND the recall election already, they still want him out and they're going to kick and scream until they get the attention and sympathy they think they deserve. 

 

The sad thing for them is that if they had another election today Walker would win once again. 



#609 JBetty

JBetty
  • VibeTribe
  • 21,158 posts

Posted 26 September 2013 - 03:31 PM

One could certainly argue his intent was to squash dissent and one could just as easily argue his intent was to make sure everyone has a fair chance to use of the rotunda. 

 

 

Good one!    :rolling:

 

 

 

 

The sad thing for them is that if they had another election today Walker would win once again. 

 

 

There you go jumping to conclusions again.

I seriously doubt he could win, considering all the negative publicity he's been getting out there the last few months.

On the other hand, with all the big money he has backing him he just might be able to pull it off.  



#610 MeOmYo

MeOmYo
  • VibeTribe
  • 7,680 posts

Posted 26 September 2013 - 03:37 PM

who cares if he would win again or not?  What does that have to do with people's right to voice their opinion?



#611 Joker

Joker
  • VibeTribe
  • 11,737 posts

Posted 26 September 2013 - 03:38 PM

Polls from a couple of weeks ago show him soundly beating Democrats Barca, Burke, Nelson or Vinehout

 

 

Voters Split on Walker, He Leads Head to Heads 

 

Raleigh, N.C. – Wisconsin’s political landscape looks roughly the same as it did seven 

months ago. Gov. Scott Walker’s job approval rating is the same: 48-49, and he still leads 

match-ups with four potential Democratic challengers by margins of four to seven points. 

 

Of these possible opponents, Kathleen Vinehout and Mary Burke had the highest 

favorability ratings at 19% and 18% respectively. Peter Barca was next with 15%. Barca 

dropped a bit since his 19% rating in February. More than 60% of respondents said they 

weren’t sure about Vinehout, Burke, Barca, and Tom Nelson. 

 

 

http://www.publicpol...ease_WI_917.pdf



#612 JBetty

JBetty
  • VibeTribe
  • 21,158 posts

Posted 26 September 2013 - 04:00 PM

I don't put much stock in polls.

So many of them have been incredibly wrong to be of any real value.

There's just too many variables to be considered for them to be accurate.

And when they do turn out to be somewhat accurate, it's probably more dumb luck than anything else.



#613 JBetty

JBetty
  • VibeTribe
  • 21,158 posts

Posted 26 September 2013 - 04:09 PM

who cares if he would win again or not?  What does that have to do with people's right to voice their opinion?

 

 

 

This is covered in at least of 2 of Jabadoodle's 42 fallacies.

Red Herring and Appeal To Popularity.



#614 Joker

Joker
  • VibeTribe
  • 11,737 posts

Posted 26 September 2013 - 04:25 PM

Red Herring indeed

 

Correct me if I'm wrong but wasn't the original protest about getting Walker out of office because of his anti-union policies?

 

The permit issue is just something the protesters are using to help draw attention to their cause by trying to appeal to the popularity of free speech. They were protesting long before it became an issue and will undoubtedly be protesting after it's been decided.



#615 JBetty

JBetty
  • VibeTribe
  • 21,158 posts

Posted 26 September 2013 - 04:55 PM

Red Herring'd again.

 

 

This thread has never been about debating the merits of getting Walker out of office, though it is a worthy goal to be sure.

It is about the peoples' right to protest the government without getting government permission, or government intervention of any sort.

But mostly it was intended as :rolling: at my parents.



#616 Joker

Joker
  • VibeTribe
  • 11,737 posts

Posted 26 September 2013 - 05:25 PM

Ahhh ok, that was addressed awhile back. The courts have ruled that "no protest zones" are legal and that there are also areas where people can be arrested for protesting.



#617 JBetty

JBetty
  • VibeTribe
  • 21,158 posts

Posted 26 September 2013 - 05:51 PM

Right.  And there used to be laws and court rulings that you could own another human being too.

Just because it's a law does not make it right or ethical, and I am grateful that there have been and still are people who are willing to stand up and do something when they see injustice.



#618 Joker

Joker
  • VibeTribe
  • 11,737 posts

Posted 26 September 2013 - 06:15 PM

See, the thing is, the reason they are there in the first place isn't to stand up and do something about that law. It's been on the books for 30 years and they didn't give a shit about it until it affected them and their ability to protest against Walker.



#619 JBetty

JBetty
  • VibeTribe
  • 21,158 posts

Posted 26 September 2013 - 06:40 PM

:lol:    You can't give a shit about something if you don't know anything about it.   



#620 Joker

Joker
  • VibeTribe
  • 11,737 posts

Posted 26 September 2013 - 07:38 PM

So which is it? Is the protest against Walker or against something they didn't know anything about?   :confused1:



#621 JBetty

JBetty
  • VibeTribe
  • 21,158 posts

Posted 26 September 2013 - 07:48 PM

It's still about Walker and his policies, one of them being squashing dissent.

And this isn't the only way he and his minions are doing it either.

They have recently begun to disallow the public and journalists into meetings that are open to everyone, for example.



#622 JBetty

JBetty
  • VibeTribe
  • 21,158 posts

Posted 26 September 2013 - 07:56 PM

UPDATED: Journalist and Public Blocked from Open Meeting

 

September 5, 2013  by Nicole Desautels and Rebecca Kemble

img_1197.jpg?w=300&h=200

Sen. Tom Tiffany (R-Hazelhurst) at the Senate Committee on Workforce Development, Forestry, Mining and Revenue.

The Wisconsin State Senate Committee for Workforce Development, Forestry, Mining and Revenue passed SB 278 on a party line vote this morning. The bill allows Gogebic Taconite to close off 3,500 acres of Managed Forest Land for public access immediately upon enactment of the law without paying the withdrawal fees they would otherwise have to pay under current law.

During the executive session Sen. Bob Jauch (D-Poplar) called the bill and the process by which it is being fast tracked through the legislature with no input from citizens from Northern Wisconsin or other sporting and recreation groups that use the land “contemptuous.” Addressing his fellow senators, Jauch said, “It matters what the people think. It isn’t our government, it’s theirs. Citizens shouldn’t feel like they’re getting stiffed by their own legislature.”

In response, Sen. Alberta Darling said, “I disagree that this shows contempt for the public and that this is a piece of slop. I don’t appreciate the language that’s being directed at those of us supporting this legislation not thinking that government is for the public.”

But the committee chair and the Capitol Police showed contempt for the public during the proceedings this morning. Access to land wasn’t the only thing blocked: Members of the public were temporarily prevented from entering the meeting room by Capitol Police officers, and a journalist was barred from filming inside the session by Senate staff.

Despite a state statute that says that during open sessions of legislative meetings  “the body shall make a reasonable effort to accommodate any person desiring to record, film or photograph the meeting,” videographer Nicole Desautels was ordered to turn off her video camera at the beginning of the session.

“I’ve been documenting events in the Capitol for 2 1/2 years, mostly for my youtube channel, LadyForward, and for the Wisconsin Citizens Media Co-op. The Progressive magazine website picks up my work on occasion as well,” says Desautels.

She adds, “Many of the senators and representatives know me or are at least familiar with my face. The clerks know who I am, the police know me. They all know that when I film I do so quietly. If I had continued to film in that meeting I would have been arrested. I find it disconcerting that Sen. Tiffany doesn’t have to follow statutes. He can make up any arbitrary rule he wants and there will be no repercussions.”

Here’s her video statement about what happened:

Katherine Bauer traveled to Madison from Menasha yesterday to give testimony at the public hearing. At the end of the hearing she asked committee chair Sen. Tom Tiffany whether the executive session would be open or closed. He assured her that it would be an open session multiple times.

Bauer arrived at the meeting room this morning to find two Capitol Police officers blocking the door. When she tried to enter she was told by Officer Steingraeber that it was a closed meeting. She insisted that Sen. Tiffany told her it was open, and finally a Senate staffer came out of the room to confirm the fact and they were allowed to enter. They were the only members of the public in the room.

Here’s Kathy’s statement:

After the hearing Officer Steingraeber said he was told by his superiors in the morning police briefing that the meeting was closed. He and another officer were ordered to stand guard at the door and not allow members of the public to enter, in apparent violation of Wis. Stat. 19.31 that states, “The denial of public access generally is contrary to the public interest, and only in an exceptional case may access be denied.”

A legislative staffer commented, “it sounds like they made a mistake.”

Desautels and Bauer both filed incident reports with the Capitol Police.

——————-

UPDATE September 23, 2013: Here is a video from the Executive Session showing some of the actions that legislators and the Capitol Police did not want the public to see. While members of the public were temporarily blocked from entering the room, Gogebic Taconite lobbyist Bob Seitz was not only allowed entry, but free rein to interact with AP reporter Todd Richmond and Sen. Grothman during the session before the vote:

 


#623 Joker

Joker
  • VibeTribe
  • 11,737 posts

Posted 26 September 2013 - 09:04 PM

Despite the heading reading "Journalist and Public Blocked from Open Meeting" it seems they were allowed in. 

 

Why should anybody believe anything at all in the article when it starts out being less than truthful.

 

It's pretty clear that much of what she writes doesn't contain the whole truth and that all she's doing is pushing her agenda. 

 

IMO a journalist who can't be trusted to be honest, isn't much of a journalist.

 

 

Do you have any actual evidence of the public and journalists not being allowed into meetings or is that it? Because it appears, despite what you and the headline claim, both the public and the journalist were allowed into the meeting.

 

 

 

 

 

 



#624 JBetty

JBetty
  • VibeTribe
  • 21,158 posts

Posted 27 September 2013 - 02:22 PM

lolJoker - pot calling the kettle black again.   :rolling:

They most certainly were blocked from going in while some business was being conducted.

It's pretty clear that much of what you wrote doesn't contain the whole truth and that all you're doing is pushing your agenda. 

 

 

 

After the hearing Officer Steingraeber said he was told by his superiors in the morning police briefing that the meeting was closed. He and another officer were ordered to stand guard at the door and not allow members of the public to enter, in apparent violation of Wis. Stat. 19.31 that states, “The denial of public access generally is contrary to the public interest, and only in an exceptional case may access be denied.”

A legislative staffer commented, “it sounds like they made a mistake.”

Desautels and Bauer both filed incident reports with the Capitol Police.

 

 

 

 

Just chalk it up to yet another "mistake".     :rolleyes:



#625 Joker

Joker
  • VibeTribe
  • 11,737 posts

Posted 27 September 2013 - 03:14 PM

They were stopped from entering immediately because of an apparent mistake. Once it was cleared up they were allowed in. The article title insinuates they weren't allowed in at all.



#626 JBetty

JBetty
  • VibeTribe
  • 21,158 posts

Posted 27 September 2013 - 04:21 PM

It clarifies in the article that the blocked access was temporary, so I don't see this as misleading at all.



#627 Joker

Joker
  • VibeTribe
  • 11,737 posts

Posted 27 September 2013 - 06:01 PM

That's my point, if it wasn't misleading from the start it wouldn't have to be clarified at all. For all we know it may have only taken the cops a minute to check and see that it was an open meeting before they were allowed in. But she chose to write it in a way that suggests they weren't let in and that the cops had plotted to keep them out.



#628 JBetty

JBetty
  • VibeTribe
  • 21,158 posts

Posted 27 September 2013 - 06:09 PM


But she chose to write it in a way that suggests they weren't let in and that the cops had plotted to keep them out.

 

Oh please - she said they were eventually let in.

 

And maybe the cops did plot to keep them out.

You don't know that they didn't.

 


#629 Joker

Joker
  • VibeTribe
  • 11,737 posts

Posted 27 September 2013 - 06:50 PM

Yes, that's my point, she had to eventually say it because the headline was misleading. 

 

 

You're right I don't know whether they did or didn't and I never said I did. 

 

So how exactly does she know that the legislators and the Capitol Police did not want the public to see the video?

 

UPDATE September 23, 2013: Here is a video from the Executive Session showing some of the actions that legislators and the Capitol Police did not want the public to see.

 

I'm guessing she doesn't have a clue and is once again just talking shit in an attempt to make it look like part of the plot against them.



#630 MeOmYo

MeOmYo
  • VibeTribe
  • 7,680 posts

Posted 27 September 2013 - 07:05 PM

It seems everyone is making shit up except for Joker, who has never been to a sing along, never worked for the Capitol Police, never worked for Walker and gets all his info off the internets.

 

Hell, he's probably never even been to Wisconsin.

 

So, everyone else is pushing an agenda and Joker is the speaker of truth.

 

:lmao:

 

that's nice.



#631 JBetty

JBetty
  • VibeTribe
  • 21,158 posts

Posted 27 September 2013 - 07:40 PM

Why should today be any different?   :dunno:



#632 Tim the Beek

Tim the Beek
  • VibeTribe
  • 16,952 posts

Posted 27 September 2013 - 07:46 PM

Hello

This thread is very interesting.

I really like that I discovered this thread that II enjoy.

I will continue checking out this post on ... to get any new ideas about this discussion.



#633 MeOmYo

MeOmYo
  • VibeTribe
  • 7,680 posts

Posted 27 September 2013 - 08:00 PM

13 pages

 

:lol: not bad



#634 TakeAStepBack

TakeAStepBack
  • VibeTribe
  • 18,965 posts

Posted 27 September 2013 - 08:02 PM

Hello

This thread is very interesting.

I really like that I discovered this thread that II enjoy.

I will continue checking out this post on ... to get any new ideas about this discussion.


 



#635 JBetty

JBetty
  • VibeTribe
  • 21,158 posts

Posted 27 September 2013 - 08:13 PM

Here's the thing about journalism.

There is NO SUCH THING as unbiased reporting - Never has been, never will be.

Every journalist brings their own life experience and their own biases into their writings, try as they might to remain neutral.

And when they're writing about something they're passionate about, of course they're going to slant it to try to help you understand their point of view.

You, Joker, frequently quote Fox News as your source, which is probably the most biased media source out there today.

I would be quite surprised to find a media outlet that publishes more blatantly untruthful information than they do.

 

So for you to continue to expect unbiased reporting from any source is simply unreasonable, as well as quite hypocritical, and I don't know why you keep yammering on and on about it, other then you love to play Mr. Contrary and stir shit up.

Want a different point of view?

Go find one and stop expecting the impossible and then complaining when you don't get what you want.



#636 JBetty

JBetty
  • VibeTribe
  • 21,158 posts

Posted 27 September 2013 - 08:15 PM

Oh yeah...   and have a nice day.   :smile:



#637 Joker

Joker
  • VibeTribe
  • 11,737 posts

Posted 27 September 2013 - 09:21 PM

Every journalist doesn't just make shit up that they can't prove though because that's not anything but National Enquirer type journalism. Does she have any type of evidence at all that the legislators and cops didn't want the public to see what was on that video? If they really didn't want it shown they wouldn't have been let in and/or they would have made sure there was no video. She's flat out making shit up, that's not journalism, it's story telling.

 

You'd be hard pressed to find more than a handful of times I've quoted FOX news in the last 6 months never mind "frequently" and if anyone has a problem when I do use it, I gladly seek out other sources.

 

In the case of what's going on out in Wisconsin I've stopped expecting anything close to unbiased reporting because most of the coverage I've seen here has been from people that are clearly part of those protesting. So what we're getting from them isn't really journalism, nor is it all true, it's more propaganda than anything else.

 

I keep yammering about it because it irks me. I'd prolly shut up if there was nothing to irk me...prolly    :winkkiss:

 

You too, enjoy the weekend and I'll see you back in the ring Monday  :circle:



#638 JBetty

JBetty
  • VibeTribe
  • 21,158 posts

Posted 30 September 2013 - 03:24 PM

Judgy As Fuck'd



#639 Joker

Joker
  • VibeTribe
  • 11,737 posts

Posted 30 September 2013 - 03:32 PM

Judgy As Fuck'd



#640 Joker

Joker
  • VibeTribe
  • 11,737 posts

Posted 09 October 2013 - 05:19 PM

Looks like they've reached a settlement where a group just has to "give notice" they will be there rather than obtain a permit.   :clap:

 

http://www.thewheele...luagreement.pdf



#641 Joker

Joker
  • VibeTribe
  • 11,737 posts

Posted 09 October 2013 - 05:22 PM

Looks like they've reached a settlement where a group just has to "give notice" they will be there rather than obtain a permit.   :clap:

 

http://www.thewheele...luagreement.pdf

 

 

ACLU of Wisconsin Announces Settlement in Capitol Free Speech Case
 

State agrees to informal “notice system” for groups gathering inside Capitol

 

 

The American Civil Liberties Union of Wisconsin today announced a settlement in its federal lawsuit against the state Department of Administration concerning free speech at the Capitol.

 

As part of the settlement, the state must create a notice system, which allows groups to gather inside the Capitol without a permit.

 

“This is a victory because giving notice is significantly different from forcing people to ask the government for permission to exercise free speech,” said Larry Dupuis, legal director of the ACLU of Wisconsin. “Giving notice is very informal. The state can’t deny use of the Capitol to anyone giving notice, unless someone else has reserved the entire space by obtaining a permit for the same time.”

 

Under the former permitting rules, which the state adopted in November 2011, groups as small as four were forced to obtain prior permission from the government before engaging in expression “for the purpose of actively promoting any cause” inside the Capitol, a public building.

 

The new rules also prohibited people from gathering in the Capitol for any performance, ceremony, presentation, meeting or rally without a permit. 

 

The ACLU of Wisconsin lawsuit, filed in February in U.S. District Court, charged that the state violated the First Amendment by requiring permits for demonstrations held inside the Capitol and by punishing protesters who gather there without a permit.

 

The ACLU of Wisconsin and Madison attorney A. Steven Porter brought the suit on behalf of Michael Kissick, an assistant professor in the University of Wisconsin-Madison School of Medicine and Public Health. In the past Kissick sometimes participated in demonstrations inside the Capitol, including the Solidarity Sing Along. 

 

Kissick ceased exercising his First Amendment rights inside the Capitol in September 2012, when police began arresting and citing people who exercised free speech there without a permit. In July, U.S. District Judge William M. Conley ordered the state to stop enforcing the permit rules for small groups. Last month, Magistrate Judge Peter Oppeneer held a mediation session between the parties, resulting in the settlement.

 

“I’m happy because this agreement allows the Solidarity Sing Along to continue as it always has,” Kissick said. “The group has effectively been giving the state notice all along, and has always deferred to events with permits.”

 

As part of the settlement, a person may give the DOA notice of a gathering of 12 or more people by phone, email, in person, or via a form supplied by the state. Notice must be given at least two business days and not more than 10 business days before an event.

 

Individuals and groups may also give notice for consecutive events, and there is no limit on how many notices an individual or group may provide.

 

“There isn’t any question that the old permitting system was unconstitutional,” said legal director Dupuis. “This settlement halts the state’s unwarranted punishment of individuals who gather inside the Capitol to exercise their free speech rights.”
 



#642 JBetty

JBetty
  • VibeTribe
  • 21,158 posts

Posted 09 October 2013 - 05:32 PM

Just for you - Happy Birthday, Jack!   :birthday:



#643 BHB

BHB
  • VibeTribe
  • 3,906 posts
  • LocationNY

Posted 09 October 2013 - 07:10 PM

what the hell?!?!  look at that sweet old lady!

 

1mad.jpg



#644 Tim the Beek

Tim the Beek
  • VibeTribe
  • 16,952 posts

Posted 09 October 2013 - 07:15 PM

Sweet old lady. Communist agitator. It's a fine line.



#645 JBetty

JBetty
  • VibeTribe
  • 21,158 posts

Posted 18 October 2013 - 08:09 PM

Abbey+Road+Singing+Arrested.jpg



#646 JBetty

JBetty
  • VibeTribe
  • 21,158 posts

Posted 23 October 2013 - 02:46 PM

Scott Walker is finally intimidated by the rule of law
 
 
 
October 16, 2013 5:00 am  •  Cap Times editorial
 
525c1a2e8c4aa.preview-300.jpg

Singers at the Solidarity Sing Along on Sept. 9 display the "unintimidated" logo they've appropriated from the title of Gov. Scott Walker's forthcoming book.

 

Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker likes to claim he is “unintimidated.” That’s the title of the upcoming book he plans to use to jump-start his presidential campaign.

There is no question that Walker knows something about intimidation. But it is comic to suggest that he is the one who had been pressured. Walker has, from the beginning of his governorship, sought to intimidate Wisconsinites who seek to exercise their rights.

But now he has been forced to back down.

Though he resisted every step of the way, the governor has finally been forced to respect his oath of office.

In January 2011, Walker swore to uphold the constitutions of the state of Wisconsin and the United States. Those constitutions guarantee the right of citizens to dissent — and to do so in the public settings where they can best speak truth to power.

The U.S. Constitution was amended at the behest of its essential author, James Madison, to include specific protections of the right to assemble and to petition the government for the redress of grievances.

The Wisconsin Constitution goes further still, declaring: "The right of the people peaceably to assemble, to consult for the common good, and to petition the government, or any department thereof, shall never be abridged.”

These are core concepts for Wisconsinites, and for all Americans.

Yet Walker did not just abandon his commitment to the constitutions of his state and nation; he assaulted the basic underpinnings of those documents with the full force of his administration. From the early days of his governorship, Walker has sought to prevent dissenters from assembling and petitioning for the redress of grievances — aggressively moving at one turn after another to abridge the right of the people peaceably to assemble, to consult for the common good, and to petition the government.

Walker and his partisan allies in the state Assembly and Senate disregarded legislative traditions, rules and open meetings laws in order to advance their signature legislation — an anti-labor law known as Act 10. And when thousands, tens of thousands and finally hundreds of thousands of Wisconsinites rose up in defense of the rule of law and the rights of working people, Walker and his aides sought repeatedly to limit access to the state Capitol.

Even as the mass protests gave way to grass-roots political activism across the state, a spirited group of citizens continued to participate in a Solidarity Sing Along at the Capitol. Though they were peaceful and good-natured, and though they willingly ceded their noon-time space in the Capitol rotunda to other groups when asked, Walker and his aides rewrote rules and bent Wisconsin traditions to try to exclude them. Yet the singers held their ground. And so Walker’s administration initiated mass arrests.

Veterans were arrested.

Retirees were arrested.

Teachers were arrested.

Firefighters and other public employees were arrested.

Journalists were arrested.

Elected officials were arrested.

Hundreds of arrests were made in a concerted effort to intimidate dissent. But the people were not intimidated. They returned to the Capitol, day after day. They embraced and exercised their constitutional rights. They defended them in court.

And they prevailed.

Last week, in response to a federal lawsuit brought by the American Civil Liberties Union of Wisconsin and attorney A. Steven Porter on behalf of Michael Kissick, an assistant professor in the University of Wisconsin-Madison School of Medicine and Public Health, the Walker administration abandoned the most draconian of its assaults on First Amendment protections.

This was a clear victory for the rule of law. Indeed, it was so sweeping that the Walker administration had to pay $88,271 in attorney fees to get itself out of the constitutional corner.

Under the settlement, the state must create a notice system, which allows groups to gather inside the Capitol without going through a process that required Wisconsinites seeking to exercise their rights to obtain a permit under restrictive and punishing rules established by the Walker administration.

“There isn’t any question that the old permitting system was unconstitutional,” said ACLU of Wisconsin legal director Larry Dupuis. “This settlement halts the state’s unwarranted punishment of individuals who gather inside the Capitol to exercise their free speech rights.”

Walker tried to intimidate Wisconsinites. But they did not back down.

Ironically, it was Walker who had to back down. This is as it should be. Politicians, be they Democrats or Republicans, liberals or conservatives, should be intimidated by the demands of our state and national constitutions.

That is particularly true of powerful executives like Scott Walker who imagine that they should be allowed to govern unintimidated by the rule the law.

So is it too late to change the title of that book?



 



#647 JBetty

JBetty
  • VibeTribe
  • 21,158 posts

Posted 23 October 2013 - 05:46 PM

Another fantastic win against Act 10: Judge Colas just ruled that the Wisconsin Employment Relations Commission (WERC) is in contempt of court for proceeding to implement the parts of Act 10 which he (Colas) found to be unconstitutional, and he ordered immediate compliance. That includes that WERC stop moving forward with re-certification elections and advising public employers, under 111.70, that any notice from WERC that stated the union was decertified be withdrawn and reversed. 

Colas said that the law is clear that when a judge finds a law to be unconstitutional that it has no existence – not just for the party who filed the law suit (MTI) but to all; that the judgment has statewide effect and bars WERC from implementation. He said that the Commissioners considered his earlier Order and disregarded it – that is contempt. He said that means that WERC implemented a law that has no legal existence and that they must immediately cease implementing any part of Act 10 which he (Colas) found to be unconstitutional – anywhere against anyone. He added that if elections go forward WERC would not be in compliance with his Order.  - Rebecca Kemble

 

 

 

 

 

WERC staffers held in contempt for ignoring ruling in Act 10 challenge

 

 

A Dane County judge who last year declared portions of a state law restricting public worker collective bargaining rights to be unconstitutional found two members of the Wisconsin Employment Relations Commission in contempt of court Monday for continuing to order union recertification elections despite his ruling.

Dane County Circuit Judge Juan Colas ordered WERC commissioners James Scott and Rodney Pasch to follow his September 2012 ruling that declared as unconstitutional annual union recertification elections under Act 10, the collective bargaining law that Gov. Scott Walker signed in 2011, among other provisions of the law he declared void.

“I think the contempt is nothing more than an attempt to elude the application of a judgment of the court that the commission knew full well applied,” Colas said

The commission had argued that Colas’ ruling last year applied only to Madison Teachers Inc. and a Milwaukee municipal workers union, who were plaintiffs in a lawsuit challenging Act 10, and did not apply statewide to other unions. But Colas said that WERC purposefully decided to disregard his ruling, which he said made enforcement of parts of the law unconstitutional to anyone anywhere in the state.

“I think that is contempt,” Colas said, “an intentional disregard of this court’s judgment.”

Walker spokesman Tom Evenson said the administration is confident the state Supreme Court will overturn Colas’ ruling.

The court is scheduled to hear arguments on Nov. 11.

“Act 10 is a constitutional law enacted by the people’s representatives and upheld in every case where we’ve had a final decision,” Evenson said. “We are confident Act 10 will be upheld in all remaining cases.”

The immediate impact is that WERC will cancel recertification elections, which were to be held Nov. 1, although WERC general counsel Peter Davis said it’s possible they could still be held by then depending on how quickly the Supreme Court acts on the state’s appeal.

Colas also ordered WERC to recognize the Kenosha Education Association as the bargaining unit for Kenosha teachers, after WERC had informed KEA that because it had failed to file for a recertification election it was no longer recognized.

“This is a very big day for us,” KEA executive director Joe Kiriaki said. He added that bargaining with the district will begin “as soon as they’re ready.”

Wisconsin Education Association Council president Betsy Kippers also said that statewide, teachers unions can again contact school districts to begin contract negotiations over wages and working conditions, as before Act 10 existed.

“We believe our case was about one thing: the value of fairness,” Kippers said.

Recertification elections for municipal worker unions were to take place early next year but will not happen unless the court overturns Colas’ ruling before then.

Assistant Attorney General Steven Kilpatrick, who argued the case for WERC and Walker, said an appeal is expected, and WERC will also likely seek an order to stay Colas’ contempt ruling.

In his ruling, Colas said the groups that asked for the contempt motion, which included WEAC, KEA and several other unions, are entitled to do so by law, where a court has declared a law unconstitutional.

Once a law has been found by a court to be unconstitutional, it is null and void to everyone, “not only to the parties that brought the lawsuit,” Colas said.

“If it wasn’t clear to the commission, it should be now,” Colas said. “They are not to enforce a law that has no legal effect.”

The question of money paid to the state by unions when they filed for recertification elections is yet to be decided.

Afterward, Lester Pines, a lawyer representing the plaintiffs in the case, said the court’s ruling affirmed the rule of law and showed the executive branch of government must follow the rulings of the judicial branch.

“The judge explained to the commission that they had an opportunity to argue their case before him and they lost,” Pines said.

Referring specifically to a statement made last year by Walker in which the governor disparaged Colas as a “liberal activist judge” after Colas’ ruling on Act 10, Pines promised that any party in the case who does that will be back in court facing another contempt motion.

“If (Walker’s) representative again attacks the judiciary and the judge, I will seek contempt,” Pines said, “whether it’s the governor or anyone else.”



#648 JBetty

JBetty
  • VibeTribe
  • 21,158 posts

Posted 16 November 2013 - 06:06 PM

Mom tells me that the Solidarity Singers will be featured on George Stephanopolous' show on ABC tomorrow (Sunday) am at 9am EDT.

Hope you're watching Joker!   :devil:



#649 TEO

TEO

    VibeGuide

  • VibeGuide
  • 24,002 posts

Posted 16 November 2013 - 09:23 PM

:lol:

 

 

:clapping:



#650 Joker

Joker
  • VibeTribe
  • 11,737 posts

Posted 16 November 2013 - 11:12 PM

Mom tells me that the Solidarity Singers will be featured on George Stephanopolous' show on ABC tomorrow (Sunday) am at 9am EDT.

Hope you're watching Joker!   :devil:

I will be watching it with the sound turned off in protest of their appearance and if there's more than 12 of them there I'm calling the cops  :joker: