My vote was a mandate.
Union puppets are special inerest puppets. Actually you are the 46.28%.

I'm not sure what you mean by "union puppets are special interest puppets." Public unions? Private unions? Both? Most have funding arms to which employees may contribute.

Honestly I'm not sure which part of the % I am, looking at it through the lens of American citizenship. Does the 47% include corporations that receive "corporate welfare" in the form of subsidies? The folks that received an amnesty from the IRS for non-reporting of offshore accounts? These are the folks that seem to have more of an "entitlement" mentality than someone working hard at a full-time job and paying tax through payroll. My opinion only, of course.

Both. Everyone you support is a union puppet and like it or not, the unions are special interests.
I know clearly which part of the % I am, I would not think it would be that confusing.

Well, receiving donations from a group doesn't necessarily translate that you are a puppet. It's putting the interests of that special interest group in front of your own constituents.

I love these discussions. Name me a politician of either side that couldn't be called a "puppet" of special interests. The public employee unions are special interest groups. Are politicians that vote in union friendly ways their puppets? Corporations are clearly special interest groups. Are politicians that receive support from them puppets? The AARP, tavern league, MADD, and the NAACP are all special interest groups. Those politicians that see things their way, are they also puppets of these groups?

Special interest groups choose candidates that are friendly to their way of thinking. They support them to improve their chances of getting elected, because they believe that once in office the politician will see things their way. I am sure there are politicians that are "for sale" to the highest bidder, but I tend to think that is the exception, not the rule.

So who would be a puppet of the special interest groups? I am for one. I am forced to support candidates that I clearly loathe every month when I pay my mandatory union dues. My father, lifelong conservative and public employee, was a puppet of a special interest group. He even had to attend pr events for candidates he didn't support because attendance for union members was mandatory.

omg brenda is actually going to defend public unions as not being puppets to the democratic socialist party.

Terry, I'm afraid I'm more cynical than you. I think more politicians are "for sale" than not and it starts early. However, the savvy ones know how to maintain a measure of balance. I suggest these Tea/GOP candidates, some of whom don't seem to understand what the job they ran for even is, lack what Paul Ryan's philosophical idol, atheist passport bride adulteress B-Novelist Ayn Rand calls "rational self-interest." Thus a Scott Walker slashes his own state in two in his slavish zeal to serve his benefactors, why a representative in Florida (R-55) submits a piece of ALEC legislation without even copy/pasting it onto her own letterhead, etc., etc., etc. This is a problem.

I don't know which candidates your union is supporting, Terry, but I am certain that they are funding candidates that are best for the union/you. My father was a lifelong private sector union member and his dues were largely allocated to non-political issues (pension, representation, etc.). His investment is rewarding him now as a retiree.

Steve, you and I disagree in our interpretations of socialism. I've lived in a country with a benign form of socialist government and I can tell you it is different. Some folks here employ the terms "socialism" and "communism" interchangeably, indicating extensive desk-top naptime during civics class.

Think about government as a neighborhood or business association, formed to improve the operating climate. Not the enemy, not a teat, etc.

Please list how Governor Walker has served his benefactors, with his slavish zeal. Do you honestly believe that the special interest unions, that supported Falk and Barrett, in the recall elections, were not expecting something in return? Neither of them showed any measure of balance.

I guess it is a question of cynicism Bren. Are the politicians for sale, or is it just that the interests of the financial supporters lie in similar paths. Did the unions buy Baldwins support, or are they supporting here because their interests match? Although I disagree fundamentally with her in almost every issue, I will at least give her the courtesy of assuming that she is a true believer not a pawn. Same with Walker and his supporters. (Thompson I do believe is for sale. Never wanted him to be the nominee)

As far as the response; "I don't know which candidates your union is supporting, Terry, but I am certain that they are funding candidates that are best for the union/you", I believe that it shows a fundamental difference in how we view the world. The only one to decide, in my opinion what candidate is best for me... is me. It is a very socialist approach to assume that the union knows better than I do, and will support who they want, even over my objections. Don't worry young man, pappa union knows what is best for you. If the state was doing this, it would be called fascism. When the union does it, well its just good progressive liberalism.

Funny how the state Supreme Court already said Act 10 was constitutional when they overturned Sumi. We have an activist Judge trying to overturn a already constitutional bill because unions and their sheep like Bren doesn't understand that the taxpayers and supreme court made their case on June 5. You lost, get over it.

His ruling is full of crap it will definitely be overturned because the basis of their argument is child's play. By the way, thank Tom Barrett for making Walker a ROCK STAR!

Actually, June 5 did yield the benefit of temporarily halting the rubber-stamping supermajority. Not everyone favors one-party control.

Unless it is Democrat control.

Let me be clear, this request for a stay will more than likely be denied because it's before the same judge that issued the decision. This motion is stupid and Hoffa doesn't understand why JB is wasting his time and our resources with it. Colas' isn't going to admit that his decision may in fact be faulty. And if he did, there would be no need for an appeal, as the trial court could simply set-aside the old decision and issue a new and conforming one.

Van Hollen needs to get off his duff, file the claim of appeal, and file the motion with the appellate court, where it will actually be successful.

Did you ever get the fifty beans from Keith Jackass? (He insists I call him that)

@Greg -

Negative - Schmitzy stiffed me!

I should start hounding him again about that until he pays up, but unfortunately, Hoffa has been busier than usual dealing with an unexpected family emergency.

Make that socialist weasel pay up, we'll put the pressure on that moocher.

Good luck with the family thing, hope it is on the up and up and not sad like this judge.

@Steve ® -

Thanks, Hoffa appreciates that!

Hoffa's 89 year old grandmother had a debilitating stroke. Her and my 94 year old grandfather lived quite independently before this happened, however, they now require regular daily assistance. As opposed to hiring a stranger or putting them in an assisted living community, the family is stepping up and providing them with the daily support they need, thus giving them some much earned dignity in their final years.

@Hoffa
As much as I disagree with your political views, I sincerely extend my hopes and sympathies to you and your family. This Saturday marks the 3 year anniversary of my Father's passing and I can in some way relate to what you are going through as I am doing the same as you for my Mother's way of life. God's peace...

89 and 94, your genes are patriots!

Guess what self-loathing fascists, I put up the offer to pay Hoffa a long time ago. I'm in the book.

To Hoffa, hiding behind his screen identity is far more important than the $50. It will be a check, written out to whomever, whose identity will be posted.

So in other words, Keith's so cheap or such a sore loser that he's adding conditions to the wager, after the fact.

I'm pretty sure no such conditions were laid out up front. And I believe Hoffa offered him a way of contacting him so he could provide him with a mailing address for the cash.

You deserve every bit of the crap and poop people dish at you constantly, Keith.

The original terms of the bet were that Hoffa was to meet with Schmitzy in persona at a public location of his choosing no later than two (2) weeks after the June 5 election had concluded.

Hoffa asked Schmitzy on numerous occasions to name a location, date, and time. Instead, Schmitzy finally replied with this:

"Keith Schmitz
6:47 am on Thursday, June 7, 2012

What's you address. I'll mail you the check."

And Hoffa responded with this:

"James R Hoffa
4:59 pm on Thursday, June 7, 2012

Schmitzy -

I thought you wanted to meet up in persona? I was looking forward to it. If not, you can send my winnings to:

Subway
c/o: James R Hoffa
1088 Milwaukee Ave
Burlington, WI 53105

Leave the 'pay to' blank, as my real name obviously isn't James R Hoffa :-)

I'll be sure to report back on Patch when I've received your correspondence!

It was fun none-the-less and I'm sorry that things didn't work out as you would have liked to have seen them. No hard feelings."

http://mountpleasant.patch.com/articles/how-did-gov-scott-walker-survive-the-recall

Thus far Hoffa has not received payment from Schmitzy.

Isn't the internet marvelous?!?!

I could be wrong but the way I understand it is that they need to FIRST go to the same judge to ask for a stay and then after that they can go to teh appellate court.

hoffa, you do realize that to refer to one's self in the third person is the sign of a mental illness don't you? please seek help!

Scott Walker clearly can't read a contract or craft an effective budget. Does he understand the difference between what is true and what he wishes to be true? One has to wonder.

@JF You are absolutely correct. Whether the judge's decision is upheld or not, he was doing his job.

I am sure Walker is eager for the issue to get an intellectual non partisan judge like Gableman -- oops I mean Sykes --- no, no -- wait, I'll think of one eventually LOL

Good luck with that... :)

Work in a government job (like I did for 15 years) before you spout out your racist crap without knowing the details of what goes on in that employment sector.

Bingo! Now we know why you are against public employee unions. Thanks for confirming my suspicions.

That is really unfortunate. It is a very derisive position to pursue and benefits no one in a democratic society. You have every right to say how feel, but like I said, in my opinion it is really unfortunate.

There is an old quote that if you give 1000 monkeys a typewriter and let them type for 1000 hours, one of them will produce a play by Shakespeare. AWD finally said something I agree with.

Affirmative action is unacceptable. Period. And I agree that public unions usually work contrary to the concept of public service, and thus should be limited. But like most things he posts, his use of it is twisted and unhealthy.

To begin with, hes wrong. Almost all government agencies are forbidden by policy, and in some cases statute, to consider racial makeup as part of their hiring decision. There are some pseudo governmental agencies that still can use affirmative action, such as universities, but in federal, state, and local government hiring it is forbidden. If you travel the state, you will find, that with some exceptions, the racial make up of the public employees matches the racial make up of the community they draw from.

Second, not for a moment do I believe his comments about it come from a noble disagreement with the concept of affirmative action. I've seen enough of his postings to know that it is just old fashioned racial hatred.

@AWD Are you aware that the US Supreme Court has recently agreed to hear the Bakke case again? It, of course, was a landmark decision concerning college admissions based on race. One of the justices has recused herself from the case, which would leave a 5 to 3 conservative majority to hear the arguments.

Failed wannabe business man Keith Schmitz needs to repay his loan from the Village of Shorewood, or forever be known as a deadbeat no talent ass clown-H. E. Pennypacker

I don't think the discussion is about business/employee relations. Our government could never be described as organized.

@ H.E.
What does character assassination have to do with the topic? Comments like yours make you look like the "ass clown"

At a cost of $7.2MM to taxpayers for the Walker recall alone, that's a pretty expensive lesson to learn for those, like yourself, who weren't able to see that while you were busying yourself with the recall process. Particularly since polls leading up to the actual recall pretty much mirrored the results from start.

You're right. People don't like recalls. Most people understand that elections are not lifetime appointments and that if the person elected doesn't do a satisfactory job, they can be replaced at the next regularly scheduled election.

Another thing people don't like and that your side is apparently blind to as well at this point, is having their local budgets hanging out in limbo while you guys waste time and more taxpayer money challenging legislation in court and getting sympathetic judges to rule in your favor, knowing full well it's going to be overturned at the State Supreme Court level.

But what the hell. It's taxpayer money and if it mucks up the works, who cares, right? It's more important that you use all means at your disposal to continue to attempt to overturn the results of the last election in any way you can.

You've learned nothing.

It's only partisan if it tends to rule in a direction other than the one you'd prefer. If it was stocked with lefties who always ruled for the Democrats when issues such as this one hit its docket, you'd call it impartial, fair and balanced.

Cut the crap.