"Obama: Wisconsin Gov's Plan Seems Like 'Assault On Unions'

[Clio the Leo]

"Obama: Wisconsin Gov's Plan Seems Like 'Assault On Unions'
Eric Kleefeld | February 17, 2011, 10:06AM

President Obama is adding his two cents to the showdown taking shape in Wisconsin, where Republican Gov. Scott Walker has proposed a state budget that would strip public employees of most collective bargaining rights. And while Obama says that fiscal "adjustments" are needed, he also says that from what he has heard the bill "seems like more of an assault on unions."

<snip>

According to the Associated Press: "The proposal would effectively remove unions' right to negotiate in any meaningful way. Local law enforcement and fire employees, as well as state troopers and inspectors would be exempt."

In the past week, the state Capitol has been deluged with protests, and some schools have closed as a result of teachers calling in sick en masse.

In an interview with the NBC affiliate in Milwaukee, Obama was asked about the controversy.

Obama's answer:

Well I'd say that I haven't followed exactly what's happening with the Wisconsin budget. I've got some budget problems here in Washington that I've had to focus on. I would say, as a general proposition, that everybody's gotta make some adjustments to new fiscal realities. And I think if we want to avoid layoffs -- which I want to avoid, I don't want to see layoffs of hard-working federal workers.

<snip>

On the other other hand, some of what I've heard coming out of Wisconsin -- where you're just making it harder for public employees to collectively bargain, generally -- seems like more of an assault on unions.

And I think it's very important for us to understand that public employees, they're our neighbors, they're our friends. These are folks who are teachers, and they're firefighters, and they're social workers, and they're police officers. You know, they make a lot of sacrifices, and make a big contribution, and I think it's important not to vilify them, or to suggest that somehow all these budget problems are due to public employees.

So, I think everybody's gotta make some adjustments, but I think it's also important to recognize that public employees make enormous contributions to the well being of our states and our cities.

http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2011/02/obama-wisconsin-govs-plan-seems-like-assault-on-unions.php

MADISON, WI - FEBRUARY 16: Protesters fill the Rotunda at the State Capitol building on February 16, 2010 in Madison, Wisconsin. Protesters were demonstrating against Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker's proposal to eliminate collective bargaining rights for many state workers.

[golddigger]

1. Seems? Pretty observant there President Obama.

[Clio the Leo]

6. Proof what he says/does is never good enough. nt

[Dr Fate]

19. "does"- what did he do? What action has he taken to back up his base, the protesters?

???

[Teaser]

27. What should he do?

I don't think calling out the national guard is an option.
But there may be others. What are they?

[Dr Fate]

31. Lead his party (even some of the Blue Dogs) to support a federal bill to give Unions more strength?

And announce this effort while present at the protest? Then follow through?

Nahhhh. To Liberal.

I guess you are right. All he can do is answer questions about it, when someone happens to ask him one.

[totodeinhere]

34. It would never get through the GOP controlled House. n/t

[Dr Fate]

36. Excuses in advance, with out even trying. Just like b/f the midterms we lost.

It is not for the centrist to "do" or "fight"- but simply to "count."

Got it. That attitude worked b/f the midterms, so it's bound to work now.

Who cares if it would put the issue even more in the spot light, energize the base like never before, and maybe even inspire other politicians to continue the fight, or inspire similar protests & events (AKA GOTV in advance).

Oh well. So long as we agree that Obama will do nothing, I guess we are in some accord.

[annabanana]

65. cardcheck cardcheck cardcheck cardcheck cardcheck

What he said he was going to do.

[Teaser]

70. that woulda been nice

however, several Senators lied about their support of this, reversing their positions after the election.

Too late now, anyway.

[golddigger]

46. No, he just comes off as weak.

[Name removed]

12. Deleted message

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Enrique]

2. here's the part that is "snipped"

We had to impose, for example, a freeze on pay increases for federal workers for the next two years, as part of my overall budget freeze. You know, I think those kinds of adjustments are the right thing to do.

[young but wise]

3. That's way better than losing your job.

[_ed_]

17. That's like saying a kick in the stomach

is better than a kick in the head.

[young but wise]

25. LOL

Not even close. Get out of here with that BS.

[martymar64]

66. Get out of here? No. He has every right to be here that you do.

[Dr Fate]

21. Besides, the Koch Brothers need that money via tax cuts more than workers.

I guess we better just take whatever we can get.

[Dr Fate]

20. You cant extend tax breaks to the Koch Brothers with out a few cuts in other places.

You know, I think those kinds of adjustments are the right thing to do.

[Bluenorthwest]

4. Of course you cut his quote to fit the need...

He actually said 'generally, it seems more like'. He could have said what you said, but he did not. He could have said 'It is Union Busting'. He did not. "Seems like" is a clear edit. He said 'generally seems more like'. Not even 'seems like'. Seems more like, generally.
If he meant to say what you said, he needs new writers.

[Clio the Leo]

5. Would you have know what he said if I hadn't ALSO posted the link to the full quote?

sillyness.

DU rules prevent me from posting the entire article.

Either way, thank you for helping kick the thread.

[polichick]

7. Not good enough Mr. President - are you with the protesters or not?? nt

[Clio the Leo]

8. What he said doesn't jive with the notion some have that he's against the working person...

"public employees, they're our neighbors, they're our friends. These are folks who are teachers, and they're firefighters, and they're social workers, and they're police officers. You know, they make a lot of sacrifices, and make a big contribution, and I think it's important not to vilify them, or to suggest that somehow all these budget problems are due to public employees."

So we must bend and twist it to meet our own fantasy of "Obama the corporate shill."

Cute.

[polichick]

9. His actions speak much louder than his have-it-all-ways words. nt

[Dr Fate]

What action will he take to support the protesters?

I'm not as interested in what he says- but what he does.

So he thinks it is important that no one "vilify" his base. Great news. Now that we have that cleared up-the fact that he does not want his own base vilified (how nice of him!)- what ACTION is he going to take to back us up?

What action do you want him to take- or is your position to just agree with whatever he does or does not do?

Is he going to take action, or must we twist and bend his inaction in order to meet your fantasty of "Obama- the guy who always sides with the little guy, not with the trans-nationals."

Cute.

[Kweli4Real]

45. What "ACTION" ...

would have the POTUS take? (Before you respond, make sure the Constitution allows for whatever you would suggest).

[Dr Fate]

50. Supporting and fighting tooth & nail for Federal laws that would stregthen unions?

And making a speech at the protest promising to do so?

Then actually following through, as if he really meant it?

I know, I know- too Liberal. Not centrist enough. Plus (insert excuse here).

[Cali_Democrat]

59. Get his ass to Wisky, make a speech and stand up for workers rights

Why is that so hard?

That is certainly not against the Constitution.

The problem is that he doesn't have the backbone to do it. He doesn't want to offend corporate America and the wealthy.

To be honest, I'm not even sure what he stands for.

[Dr Fate]

63. And then FOLLOW UP after the speech with a tooth & nail fight.

Also not against the constitution.

Note that the "But it's not his job-this is a state issue" excuse changes to something like "But if he takes action or directly supports the protests, the media will make it about Obama instead of the workers." This occurs once you shoot down all the excuses for why Obama should not be more directly involved.

I'd love to see more ways to fight as opposed to this clearing house for excuses.

[Thrill]

15. Results of Democrats not working hard to get out the vote

This is what you get. You get a Republican Governor and Russ Feingold sitting at home instead of fighting in the Senate.

[Dr Fate]

22. Results of dumb ass "centrists" counting on independents to support their issues.

Liberals voted DEM and worked hard for DEMS, depsite the fact that "centrists" compromised away so many issues that we cared about.

Every thing we gave away was supposedly in an effort to impress "moderates" and "independents."

Guess what- the "moderates" and "independents" that "centrists" worked so hard to impress voted GOP, or stayed home.

When you let centrists undermine populism in our party, this is what you get.

LOL! I love how you would rather blame liberals for the midterms as opposed to taking the position that Obama should take some action here in the present..

[_ed_]

16. Just like Egypt

he'll wait until one side appears to be winning and then support that side. It also matters what the mainstream beltway press think about it, so he'll have to wait and see what his opinion is once David Broder publishes an op-ed.

[Dr Fate]

24. Liberals will never undermine centrist core beliefs and values...

...whatever they may be at any given moment.

[martymar64]

67. Ah, the Larry Tate approach.

[totodeinhere]

37. Obama was too busy giving Bush the Medal of Freedom award to follow events in Wisconsin closely.

But seriously, I would expect something much more forceful from our Democratic president. Public sector workers are under assault anywhere there is a GOP governor, and we need presidential leadership to stop it.

[PlanetBev]

10. Why does he after to tippy-toe around everything?

It is an assault on unions. What the hell else is it?

[Name removed]

14. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[polichick]

18. Could be, but I'm not sure he really believes in progressive principles...

He's a free market "New Democrat."

[ClarkUSA]

32. LOL! He, as a former community organizer, believes in it more than any Wal-Mart lawyer ever could.

<< He's a free market "New Democrat." >>

Wrong. Unlike the Clintons and their Blue Dog admirers, Barack Obama never been a member of the DLC.

[polichick]

33. Do your homework - the DLC does not equal New Dems. nt

[ClarkUSA]

40. Check your facts. DLC does indeed equal New Dems. Just ask Hillary.

[Dr Fate]

44. Blue Dogs, DLCers, "New Democrats"- whatever they are calling themselves this week.

None of then are going to do much of anything to help Unions or these protestors. There is not as much nuance among these conservative DEM factions as you indicate.

[Dr Fate]

35. He extended tax cuts to Wal Mart CEOs and their lawyers.

Tax cuts of a proportion that no one in the "community" will likely ever see.

[ClarkUSA]

42. No, Congressional Republicans and their Blue Dog allies did that. Pres. Obama was against it.

The same bill extended tax cuts to the middle-class of a proportion I will see this year. Team Obama did manage to successfully push through a second stimulus which Republicans bemoaned after the fact; the middle-class will reap the benefits of a year-long payroll tax holiday which will net me enough to pay one-month's mortgage, which ain't small potatoes.

[Dr Fate]

47. Presdient signed it. That's not being "against it." Did he call out any Blue Dogs, by name?

What he says he is against and his ultimate actions can be 2 diff. things.


Blue Dogs forced him?

I'll bite.

Did he call out the Blue Dogs by name, telling his base that these are the people we need to petition-Or is it fair to say that the Blue Dogs & centrist DEMS are actually his allies?

If he is opposed to Blue Dogs, I never heard him call individuals out by name, or even as a group by the moniker "Blue Dogs" or any other.

The tax cut I got aint jack shit compared to what he signed over to the Koch Brothers and the Wallmart CEOs- I'm still in just as much debt and my bills have only gone up.

We wont reap any benefits that even come CLOSE in proportion to what Obama & the Blue Dogs gave to the Cheneys, the Bushs, the Waltons, the Koch Brothers, etc.

Really a diff issue all together, but I have to laugh when DUers try to indicate that Obama disagrees with Blue Dogs and is somehow fighting them to be more progressive- what a joke.

[ClarkUSA]

64. The President signed the entire bill which encompassed middle-class tax cuts and other good stuff.

I benefitted from what was in that bill and I'm not wealthy. It's a matter of record that Pres. Obama was against the Bush tax cuts for the wealthy and Blue Dogs weren't on the same page as Pres. Obama on this issue for the most part. I laugh when DUers try to indicate otherwise when the facts support my claims.

[Dr Fate]

77. Except my tax cut does not leave me extra money like it does for the Koch Brothers.

It's a matter of record that Obama worked hand in hand with Mitch McConnel. then signed into law, a bill that makes the rich richer and basically brings the middle calss back to where they were a few years ago, if that.

The Koch Brothers? Obama gave them so much of the US treasury that they will have MILLIONS left over to pour into elections, propaganda campaigns, etc. LOL! Is that what passes for long term strategy amongst "centrists"?

Blue Dogs are soley to blame, and Obama disagrees with them?

I'll bite. Name the Blue Dog who Obama called out by name as someone he opposed. So Obama said to his base - "These are the DEMS who oppose us- I need you to petition them, write them, and demand that they support the party and the President on this..." Or something like that?

Show us the news stories where Obama had that knock down, drag out, "arm twisting" fight with any Blue Dog to get them to do the right thing.

Hell- show me Obama even saying the phrase "blue dogs" in a reference to him being opposed to them on tax cuts.


Blue Dogs supported Tax cuts for the Koch Brothers, Obama signed the bill. On the same page. It's a matter of record.

I laugh when DUers try to claim that Blue Dogs, DLCers and New Democrats are Obama's enemies, not his close allies and ideological soulmates.

[Teaser]

28. I agree with you that Obama is Worse Than Hitler

.

[polichick]

38. That poster said nothing of the kind. nt

[Greybnk48]

11. It's an assault on Unions, non-union state workers, the

UW-System, the Public School system in Wisconsin (especially MPS, the state's whipping boy), among others. This is a radical, unprecedented power grab that should scare the shit out of everyone. How WI goes on this, so goes the nation.

[Dr Fate]

13. New fiscal realities. Such as extending tax cuts to the Koch Brothers, the Cheneys, etc?

It would be nice if Obama's political realities would spread that kind of cash to regular people. Maybe the states would not be in so much trouble if Obama would give regular people the same proportion in tax cuts that he hands out to the Koch Brothers, the Bush family, out-sourcers, etc.

Dont expect Obama, Pelosi or Reid to back or express the importance of this AMERICAN protest like they did for the foreign protests way over in Eqypt. It's just not "centrist" enough. At best, they will just sit tight until the conservatives win.

LOL! "New fiscal realities" indeed.

[martymar64]

68. Silly Dr, regular people don't give big enough donations to be heard.

Only big shots bearing big fat contribution checks get to be heard.

He dithered on Egypt, now he'll dither on Wisconsin and Ohio and everywhere else the oligarchs try this assault on working people.

[Dr Fate]

23. "Obama was asked about the controversy"

In other words, he may have not even talked about it if given the choice. He had to be asked about it.

I wonder what Pelosi & Reid will "say" if and when they are "asked."

[geek tragedy]

26. I guess "assault on unions" isn't enough for the Obama is the root of all evil

crowd.

[Dr Fate]

30. He said it "seems" like it might be. His talking was much softer & "centrist" sounding...

...than you indicate.

[geek tragedy]

39. "assault on unions" is very strong language for a President

to use while referring to a state law. People getting hung up on "seems to" are looking for an excuse to complain.

[Dr Fate]

41. Will strong action follow his supposedly strong language?

Or shall we craft excuses in advance for why it wont?

[geek tragedy]

43. What strong action? This isn't a federal matter. nt

[Dr Fate]

48. Unions could be strengthened via federal law. Next excuse?

Instead of trying to say that it is impossible for Obama to take any action besides answering questions when asked, why dont you just admit what you really mean- that you predict he will not take any meaningful action.

What Federal law keeps Obama from flying down to the rally for a few hours and making some strong speeches and promises to Unions as to what can be done on a Federal level, then doing everything he can to follow through with the fight?

I'm not hear to make excuses in advance- I'm here to wonder aloud why Obama, Reid & Pelosi are basically MIA on this.

[geek tragedy]

49. Because this is a STATE issue.

There is no role for the federal government here.

Strong speeches don't accomplish shit. The sooner people figure that out, the better.

[Dr Fate]

52. Wrong. He could fight for a federal bill that would strengthen any union position.

And he could announce this fight at the rally. It would highlight the issue, fire up his base like never before, maybe it could inspire other legislation, inspire other protests, rallys, etc. (AKA GOTV for 2012)

Hell- with the right leadership & strategy, maybe he could even get something through. It would be better than the tepid response that he had to be asked to give.

I'm not asking for just strong speeches- but for a fight and some organization following such a speech.

The real issue for you is that you KNOW he will never do such things- so we must be content with excuses in advance.

[geek tragedy]

54. A federal bill that would not change the situation in Wisconsin

and which would have zero chance of passing Congress?

Obama speaking up in favor of it would make it about Obama instead of about the workers.

[Dr Fate]

55. Excuses in advance, without even trying. Just like b/f the midterms we lost.

"Obama speaking up in favor of it would make it about Obama instead of about the workers."

LOL! What a lame-ass excuse. You KNOW Obama will not speak out, so you make excuses in advance for why he will not.

If Obama did speak out even more, you would cheer and support such an effort.

First your excuse was something vague about federal powers, but now that I have shot that one down, your excuse has morphed into this being about media and PR. Keep 'em comming!

I note that you also ignore my points about rallying the base, encouraging other law makers to act & stand up, etc. Best to ignore it and pretend it would not work, since you seem to predict that Obama has no intention of making it happen.

I'm not sure if you are right- I think a Pro-Union Federal bill could very much strengthen unions in WS and other states- but I can see why you need to make the excuse that it might not.

[geek tragedy]

57. Um, Obama did speak out.

He called it "an assault on unions."

But, for the people who want Action Hero Obama instead of President Obama, it's not enough.

[Dr Fate]

60. But but but- you just warned us that speaking out would "make it about Obama."

And you seemed to think that was a very negative thing.

But now you seem to acknowledge that speaking out (he was asked a question, not speaking out on his own, btw)might be okay!

Which is it? Do you want to Obama to speak out more, or do you still maintian the excuse that it would be a bad thing?

In any event, my argument was that he should continue to not just speak up, but follow through with a real fight. Some strong words, promises and actions besides his answering questions that someone had to ask him.

Action hero? No, but a president who continues to speak out, promises to and fights to strengthen Unions on a federal level. LOL! I guess I just read too many comic books, wishing for such action & super heroics.

[geek tragedy]

61. No, speaking out is appropriate.

Publicity stunts like heading down there personally to speak at the protest would make it about him instead of the workers.

[Dr Fate]

62. Right -so your "But he did speak out" comment has no context.

Considering that we both acknowledge what he already said when he was asked about this issue.

Your quote:

"Obama speaking up in favor of it would make it about Obama instead of about the workers."

The point is that you have at least 2 excuses now, or at least you think you do.

Lets see- the 1st one was that a President cannot fight for laws that affect unions on a federal level. The 2nd one is that the GOP & media will "make it about him" if he stands in front of and supports Liberals on this issue.

What wonderful excuses! Is this the year 2009, all over again?

The good news is if Obama does do something like I suggest, you are still allowed to support it, and pretend that you always did. As it is, you will support whatever Obama does or does not do, and you will say you oppose anything you predict he will not do, unless he ends up doing it.

If Obama showed up at the protest, you would cheer that effort and assure everyone that it is a great idea. Since you know he will not, you are forced to pretend that it is a bad idea.

[geek tragedy]

51. P.S.

http://www.politico.com/blogs/bensmith/0211/DNC_playing_role_in_Wisconsin_protests.html?showall

[Dr Fate]

53. Encouraging. Better info than the usual excuses. n/t

n/t

[Starbucks Anarchist]

81. It's why they can never accomplish anything.

They get hung up on a minor wording issue instead of focusing on the real problem.

[Teaser]

29. Now he's sent OfA to help? He really is so much worse than Hitler.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.phpaz=show_mesg&forum=439&topic_id=438531&mesg_id=438531


He's going to annex the Sudetenland next, I just know it.

[Cali_Democrat]

56. Weak sauce. n/t

[Dr Fate]

58. "Seems" like it. n/t

n/t

[boppers]

71. Well, there are a few folks playing fast and loose with facts.

Example:
Q. Are Unions still allowed to organize, and negotiate wages, under the proposed law?
A. Yes.

However, that little tidbit seems to be lost under all the slogans.

[Dr Fate]

72. So you defend GOP Governor, while I side with the loyal, DEM voting Unions. Fair enough. n/t

n/t

[boppers]

73. I side with truth.

Regardless of who's gaming it, honesty is more important to me than party, politics, or appearances.

That's *why* I'm not a rethuglican.

[Dr Fate]

74. So you support the GOP bill, or do you stand with the DEM voting Unions?

Or do you just seem to defend the GOP bill for the benefit of elected DEMS who will not stand against it?

[boppers]

75. The bill is wonky, and I don't like it.

That doesn't mean I'm willing to lie about what is in it.

[Dr Fate]

76. So your position is that the Unions are basically lying and the GOP is telling God's truth.

Should I assume that you do not stand with the DEM voting Unions on this?

[boppers]

78. No, my position is that the truth is being distorted.

I wouldn't pass any litmus test that depends on standing by lies and distortions.

I'm not a "with us or against us" republican.

[Dr Fate]

79. So do you oppose the Union position, or do you stand with them? n/t

n/t

[boppers]

80. I oppose forced dues, mandatory group membership, and the exclusion of unions from the workplace.

There isn't one "position" in play, this is about many more issues than standing on one side or another.

Thus, I find myself pro-union, but unable to stand with them, because they are expressing anti-union positions.

[StarsInHerHair]

69. K&R 12

nt