Slow train coming

By Capt. Fogg

One of the most frequently recurring themes echoing inside the bubble of Obamahate culture is that the President, although handily elected, was somehow thrust upon us by mistake and is an unelected tyrant.

It takes a special kind of person to believe that. It takes a special kind of person to attempt to profit by that belief and it takes a special kind of specialness not to be able to smell the boot polish and Cordite when reading about Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker's plan to take over municipal governments (duly elected) as part of his plan for prosperity through penury.

Forbes' Rick Ungar calls it Financial Martial Law. The Walker plan: 

would empower the governor to insert a financial manager of his choosing into local government with the ability to cancel union contracts, push aside duly elected local government officials and school board members and take control of Wisconsin cities and towns whenever he sees fit to do so.

I have no doubt that's just what the Tea-Shirts would like and little doubt that they will be able to reconcile that with their flimsy facade of Constitutional reverence. 

Such a law would additionally give Walker unchallenged power to end municipal services of which he disapproves, including safety net assistance to those in need.

That's not tyranny, that's not the kind constitution shredding the baggery would love to attribute to the President: at least it's not to the Tea-drunk masses longing to break free of any remaining bonds of civilization.

It'll never happen? It's liberal hyperbole? Think a state government can't simply strip a municipality's elected government of all power by gubernatorial fiat? You say this isn't possible in America? It's already happened in Michigan. Perhaps it's coming soon, to a state near you.

I'll spare you a rant about Fascism and Mussolini, the perils of "special emergency powers" and Orwell's eternal boot heel, I suspect you've read enough 20th-Century history to know what I'm talking about, but I suspect too that the years I have left to me will be years of counting up the mounting victories of barbarism, and the steady descent of our empire. Perhaps it's high time that I got back to studying Chinese.

(Cross-posted from Human Voices.)

Ugh; or, being under the weather and watching Republicans push America over a cliff

By Michael J.W. Stickings

Sorry, I'm a bit under the weather this week, which is why I haven't blogged much the past few days -- it's one of those things that's tough to shake.

But stay tuned. We'll keep posting, and I hope to be back to normal soon.

In the meantime, some suggestions:

-- Karoli, Crooks and Liars: "UPDATED: Conservative Waukesha County Clerk "Finds" 7,000 Votes For Prosser." (Loads of reaction to yesterday's stunning news from Wisconsin at Memeorandum.)

From state to federal...

-- Steve Benen, Political Animal: "Would Boehner Shut Down the Government Over Planned Parenthood?"

It's all (or a lot) about so-called policy riders:

-- Brian Beutler, TPM: "Riders Caused The Storm: Government Shutdown Looms Over Anti-Abortion And Anti-EPA Measures."

And Republicans, who would likely lose politically in the event of a government shutdown (though both sides are preparing their spin), are trying to make it about the troops:

-- Tanya Somanader, ThinkProgress: "While Slamming Obama For Opposition To 'Troop Funding Bill,' House GOP Votes Down Troop Funding -- Twice." 

Just your typical GOP bullshit. I'm surprised they didn't try to make it about 9/11.

Have a nice day.

-- Michael

Judge blocks Wisconsin's anti-union law... for now

By Michael J.W. Stickings

Well, we knew there was something quite possibly illegal about how Republicans rammed through their anti-union legislation in Wisconsin, and a judge agrees that, at the very least, there needs to be a full hearing on what happened:

CHICAGO — A judge issued a temporary restraining order on Friday that prevents Wisconsin's new law cutting collective bargaining rights for public workers from taking effect, at least for now.

The decision, issued by Judge Maryann Sumi of the Dane County Circuit Court, temporarily bars Wisconsin's secretary of state from publishing the controversial law, one of the procedural requirements for it to come into effect in the state. Publication had been expected late next week, but Judge Sumi’s ruling delays that until at least March 29, when she plans to hold a full hearing on a lawsuit that questions the validity of the collective bargaining law based on the speedy manner in which it was carried out earlier this month. 

I'm hardly an expert on such matters, but I suspect that the law, or rather the process by which the law came into being (or almost came into being, as it's not a law yet), will be upheld. Republicans certainly engaged in any number of shenanigans, including ripping out the money elements of the bill so that, as a non-budgetary matter, it didn't require the necessary quorum of senators for passage, but I'm just not sure there's enough to reject the legislation altogether.

No, while "[o]pponents of the measure said they hoped the decision was but the first of many that would ultimately undo legislation that has split the state and drawn tens of thousands of demonstrators to the state capital over a matter of many weeks," the place to fight this legislation is not in the courts but in the court of public opinion and then at the polls. And that means not just voting out Gov. Walker and Senate Republicans but, where possible, recalling them even before they're up for re-election.

Don't get me wrong, it may very well be worthwhile to keep fighting this in the courts, I'm just not sure that's where Democrats and other opponents of the legislation are most likely to be successful.

In Madison, the voice of Main Street speaks for America

By Michael J.W. Stickings

Conservatives will continue to spread their dishonest nonsense that the "voice" of the Tea Party is the voice of "real" America, but, on Saturday, a newer movement, rising up in response to the right-wing assault on labor in Wisconsin (and on working people everywhere), spoke loud and clear, giving voice to the forces of justice and fairness against the plutocratic Republican effort to keep them down:

Police estimated up to 100,000 people turned out in Madison, WI [on Saturday] to protest Gov. Scott Walker's (R) assault on unions, making it bigger than any protests the city has witnessed, even those during the Vietnam War. The Madison rally is part of a much larger Main Street Movement of average Americans demanding fairness in labor laws, social spending, and taxation that has emerged in Ohio, New Jersey, Florida, Michigan, and elsewhere. But [Saturday]'s rally in Madison is noteworthy because at 85,000-100,000, it was bigger than the biggest tea party protest, the September 12, 2009 rally in Washington, D.C., which turned out only an estimated 60,000-70,000. A photo of the Madison rally [on Saturday]:


For two years, tea party activists and their allies in the GOP have claimed that the hard-right movement represents the true beliefs of the American people. But the crowd in Madison and numerous polls tell a different story.

And, of course, the media establishment -- whether suckered by or sympathetic to conservative objectives -- will continue to hype up the Tea Party into far more than it really is. Yes, to be fair, the protests in Wisconsin have garnered a great deal of attention, but we know what narrative the media will push.

All the more reason why the Main Street Movement must not let up. It must demand to be heard -- and must demand real change the American people, and not just Tea Party fanatics, can believe in.

Remember that slogan, Mr. President? It used to mean something. Maybe 100,000 people in Madison, along with the voices of the middle class, not to mention the poor, who are usually dismissed entirely, throughout the country, will make it mean something again.

The good from Wisconsin

By Michael J.W. Stickings

The Republican assault on Wisconsin's public-sector unions is by no means a good thing, but there is actually some very positive news to report:

First, Republicans may very well have committed political suicide.

Second, the public is strongly behind the unions (and organized labor generally), and supportive of the right to bargain collectively, and against Gov. Walker and the Republicans.

Third, with a recall effort underway, a new poll shows solid majorities of voters against two Republican state senators, and the results of the poll, conducted before last night's vote, may actually understate the opposition.

Fourth, liberal-progressive groups are reporting huge fundraising boosts, particularly since last night's vote.

Fifth, according to Politico, "AFL-CIO President Richard Trumka is anointing [Gov. Walker] the 'Mobilizer of the Year' for galvanizing union members and supporters into action," a development that bodes well for the elections next year, both for Obama and for Democrats across the country, including in labor-heavy rust belt states like Ohio, Pennsylvania, Michigan, Indiana, West Virginia, and, of course, Wisconsin.

Sixth, Republicans may have broken the law in passing the bill, meaning legal challenges and more trouble for those troubled Republicans.

Remember what I said about political suicide?

Wisconsin Republicans vote to take collective bargaining rights away from public-sector unions

By Michael J.W. Stickings

How did they do it? Well, by cheating, in a way. Or perhaps by committing political suicide. I'll let Ezra Klein explain:

Here's what just happened in Wisconsin: The rules of the state's Senate require a quorum for any measures that spend money. That's how the absence of the Senate's Democrats could stymie Gov. Scott Walker's proposed budget law -- it spent money, and thus it needed a quorum.

But in a surprise move earlier today, Wisconsin's Senate Republicans rewrote the bill and left out all the parts that spent money. Then they quickly convened and passed the new law, which included the provisions stripping most public-employee unions of their collective bargaining rights but excluding everything in the law that spent money.

What happens next? Expect the protests over the next few days to be ferocious. But unless a judge rules the move illegal -- and I don't know how to judge the likelihood of that -- Walker's proposed law will go forward. The question is whether Walker and the Republicans who voted for it will do the same.

Polls in Wisconsin clearly showed that Republicans had failed to persuade the public of their cause. Walker's numbers dropped, while Democrats and unions found themselves suddenly flush with volunteers, money and favorable media coverage. And they plan to take advantage of it: Eight Wisconsin Republicans have served for long enough to be vulnerable to a recall election next year, and Democrats have already begun gathering signatures. Now their efforts will accelerate.

As indeed they should. But will Democrats succeed?

I really do think Republicans overreached here. They thought it would be easy to take down the public-sector unions, to deprive them of their very essence (the right to bargain collectively on behalf of their members, who on their own would never have such strength and who, as we know from pre-union days, would be abused in one way or another by their employers) -- perhaps just to stick it to them, perhaps as an opening shot against organized labor generally, perhaps to weaken the Democratic Party. But the grand right-wing conspiracy was exposed, backed by the Koch brothers and pushed by Republican business and other anti-government interests, and also by a popular governor who apparently without knowing it put his political career on the line.

To their credit, the people of Wisconsin rallied in support not just of their public-sector unions but of labor unions, and labor, generally. Republican legislators look bad, Walker himself looks especially bad, and all over the country Republicans who expressed their support for this assault and who are linked to the Koch brothers are implicated in what has become a deeply unpopular move.

The Republicans may have acted within the law by removing the money parts from what was a budget bill -- as if that makes any sense -- but their motives are clear and I suspect the people of Wisconsin will hold them accountable.

When those Democrats fled the state to prevent the state Senate from having a quorum, who knew where all this would lead? As people came to understand what the issue was all about, and just what these Democrats opposed, it didn't take long for the Republicans, both in Wisconsin and elsewhere, to expose themselves for what they are, which is the enemy of working people everywhere, the party of the plutocrats, the party of the Koch brothers.

Republicans traditionally hype the supposed "culture wars" to divert the attention of the non-wealthy away from economic issues and their pro-business, plutocratic ways, scaring low-information voters into their corner, whether it's civil rights or terrorism or any other "threat" to America. They're still doing that -- just look at what IRA-backer Peter King is doing -- and they've been successful doing it, but this time they seem to have awakened a self-awareness in the electorate that will not easily be denied.

Why we need labor unions

By R.K. Barry

I have supported labour unions for as long as I can remember. I grew up in a union household. My father was a member of the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers. I put myself through school in the late '70s and early '80s by working in unionized grocery store chains as a member of the Amalgamated Meat Cutters and the United Food and Commercial Workers Union.

I remember at the time having discussions with people who didn't like unions. They either didn't think they were necessary or didn't think they were a positive force in the country. I could never understand this kind of logic, especially as it frequently came from working-class people.

Generally, I assumed that they didn't understand the history of the labour movement and how they benefitted even if they were not themselves a member of a union, how working conditions and compensation improved for everyone because of unions and how easy it would be for gains to be lost.

The bottom line for me has always been that unions are about respect for the employee, the ability to negotiate fair compensation certainly, but also a modicum of protection should relations with an employer sour for whatever reason. And to be clear, a problem could be, for example, the fact that you've been around too long and make too much money and they want to replace you with someone younger and cheaper.

Anyone who has ever had a job knows that things can go awry with one's supervisor or the organization with which one is employed. It's human nature in general terms, but it's also human nature in a highly competitive market economy. If you have ever worked in a union shop and a conflict arises with management -- and conflicts always arise -- you know that there are mechanisms to deal with the problem and that you have some protection from summary dismissal or other kinds of action contrary to your interests.

What I recall vividly about working in a unionized shop is that the workers feel better about themselves, have more self-respect and pride because they know that they are backed by a collective agreement that puts in place mechanisms to mediate problems and negotiate on their behalf.

It's not even that I think employers necessarily want to be bastards, but that our economic system is based on competition. The exigencies of competition can mean that employees are chewed up if they stand alone. Too many things can go wrong in a workplace for an employee -- too many things that are patently unfair -- to fail to see the need for collective bargaining.

It's been that simple for me for a long time. That the employer may not see it that way is pretty clear. But so what? Fair is fair, and if the only way to guarantee a degree of justice on the job is to level the playing field somewhat, what could be more American?

So it is not surprising to me that a strong majority of Americans, according to a recent poll, oppose depriving public sector employees of collective bargaining rights. Specifically, a New York Times/CBS poll indicated that 60 percent of Americans oppose taking away even "some" of public employees' collective bargaining rights.

Anyone who has ever had a job understands that securing a decent living frequently requires having the political and economic power to fight for your rights. Perhaps people are developing a new understanding, especially in lean economic times where fairness is one of the first things to go, that we hang together or we hang separately (metaphorically speaking).

James Gray Pope, who teaches constitutional and labor law at Rutgers Law School in New Jersey, recently wrote: 

The idea that anybody who works hard should enjoy the American Dream harks back to the 1950s and 1960s, when unions were strong enough not only to win decent wages and benefits for their own members (who made up more than 30 percent of the private workforce, as opposed to 7 percent today), but also to induce many non-union employers to pay similar wages to avoid unionization. 

Those were the days of what economists call "The Great Convergence," when the incomes of rich and poor were relatively close, and all Americans shared to some extent in our country’s prosperity. 

As we know, those days ended and union membership declined precipitously, as did the gap between the very rich and the rest of us. As Professor Pope puts it: 

Unfortunately for American workers, corporate employers launched a relentless campaign against unions and union standards. In 1981, when President Ronald Reagan fired hundreds of air traffic controllers for refusing to accept his terms and going on strike, employers took it as a green light to break unions. They discovered that they could instill fear and discourage organizing by firing workers for joining unions and threatening to close facilities if workers voted union. 

Public-sector unions are one of the last strongholds of the union movement in America so, clearly, we should not be surprised that conservatives everywhere, who seem hell-bent on doing the bidding of corporate power, either want to weaken them dramatically or destroy them outright. 

Our economic system, for better or worse, is a competitive system. At the end of the day, it's better for the system taken as a whole if both management and labour have enough power to make the relationship fair. 

As I have written elsewhere, the concentration of wealth and power in America is now such that it should be inconceivable that we would want to dismantle one of the few oppositional forces that has in our history been able to provide a counterweight to that wealth and power. 

It seems that a lot more Americans are now understanding this. Perhaps when this current skirmish is over, we will have Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker to thank for helping more people understand. 

The high numbers in support of collective bargaining for public-sector unions suggests to me that a lot of people understand that confronting the power of an employer as an individual is difficult at best and usually impossible. 

Sure, a lot of people may look at public-sector contracts and resent the fact that they themselves are not in such a strong position and side with conservatives. It seems that a lot more of us look at those public-sector contracts and ask why more of us can't have access to greater security in our working life and a better standard of living.

(Cross-posted at Lippmann's Ghost.)

Democrats push for recall of Republican state senators in Wisconsin

By Michael J.W. Stickings

Greg Sargent:

The Wisconsin Democratic Party has decided to throw its weight behind a nascent grassroots drive to recall a number of GOP state senators, a move that will considerably increase the pressure on them to break with Governor Scott Walker, the Dem party chair confirms to me.

"The proposals and the policies that Republicans are pushing right now are not what they campaigned on, and they're extreme," the party chair, Mike Tate, said in an interview. "Something needs to be done about it now. We're happy to stand with citizens who are filling papers to recall these senators."

Previously, Wisconsin Dems had not publicly supported talk about recalling GOP Senators, in hopes of privately reaching a negotiated solution to the crisis. The Wisconsin Democratic Party's decision to support the recall drives represents a significant ratcheting up of hostilities and in essence signals that all bets are off.

You know what's great about this? For once, Democrats aren't putting up with Republicans' shit, with their efforts to implement an extremist right-wing agenda that voters strongly oppose (and only support when the GOP's propaganda, pushed through a willing media establishment, screws with their heads).

And also, for once, Democrats are actually winning the issue and driving the narrative, sending Republicans into fits of defensive desperation.

Feels good, doesn't it?

Union-busting and the Koch brothers' plans for our future

By R.K. Barry

As we consider attempts by Governor Scott Walker of Wisconsin to bust public sector unions, not to mention New Jersey Governor Chris Christie's constant rants against these unions in his own state, it doesn't take a genius to figure out that there is a plan afoot – a concerted effort by Republican politicians to do something that they always wanted to do but may not have previously seen a clear path to accomplish.

And, although former White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel has been widely credited with saying that one should never let a good crisis go to waste, it seems his best students have been Republican governors.

Yes, the economy went to rat shit because of the malfeasance of Wall Street types, leaving everyone feeling vulnerable to personal economic collapse, which, in turn, has given Republican politicians the excuse they have longed for to get rid of public sector unions.

It's pretty simple. Point to people who have bargained their salaries and working conditions in good faith, have come to agreement with their employers as part of a legitimate negotiating process, and make them a target for others who are in precarious employment situations, or perhaps unemployed.

Feed on the worst aspects of human nature, which is to say that if some people are not doing well, others, with whom they may generally occupy the same economic class, should not be doing well either. Make it sound like everyone in a public sector union is driving a luxury car and vacationing in the Riviera. Divide working people so they cannot be a threat to the power of wealth and privilege in American. Make then forget who got us into this mess in the first place and stop them from asking annoying questions. Brilliant.

What is not being talked about enough, I believe, is that the assault on public sector unions is an assault on the idea that government is an effective force for good in our society. But, in this case, it's a two-for-one sale. Attacking public sector unions is an attack on the idea of an expanded role of government but also on the idea of unions: two forces that have always been a major impediment to massive private wealth in the United States doing whatever it chooses to do (while admittedly playing that role imperfectly).

Two things that wealth and privilege hate in America: government regulating their activities and working people having their own independent base of power. Take away collective bargaining for public sector unions and you clear the way for making government smaller and destroy yet another potential oppositional force. 

The rhetoric of someone like Governor Christie is priceless. In his world, gold-plated public sector contracts are paid for by working people who don't happen to be on the gravy train. This creates the potential of working people at each other’s throats with the goal of reducing the size of government and its ability to regulate the economy while destroying unions all at the same time. Who would have thought that an economic crisis could be so useful for the power elite?

How any working people can believe that smaller government and fewer effective unions will mean that they will have more freedom and autonomy to do the things they want to do is beyond me.

Whether one wants to go back and look at John Kenneth Gailbraith's theory of countervailing power or some variant of Robert Dahl's theory of pluralism, whatever else their defects, it's pretty obvious that there is real and concentrated economic power in America and those who hope to have real freedom and autonomy had better consider how they will come together, and organize, to challenge that power. Government at times can be helpful, unions as well, as can many different kinds of social movements.

Working people who fail to organize in their own interests or fail to support others who do will wonder how it is that their piece of the pie got so small.

Reduce the size and effectiveness of government, destroy the right of people to bargain collectively, to organize politically, and you will have ceded the entire playing field to the same Wall Street hacks and their cheerleaders in the Republican Party who have grown pretty comfortable with the growing inequalities of wealth in America.

The genius of the right is that they have always been able to find ways to get working people to fight amongst themselves.

Tea Partiers may think that reducing the size of government and the power of public sector unions will lead to a utopia where everyone, even the least among us, is free to realize his or her own version of the American Dream.

The Koch brothers sincerely thank you for being so naive.

(Cross-posted at Lippmann's Ghost.)

Are Wisconsin Republicans conspiring to kidnap?

Guest post by Publius 

Publius has lived in and spent most of his life thinking about Washington, D.C. He is an attorney, an avid sports fan, and the editor of The Fourth Branch.

(Ed. note: This is Publius's third guest post for us. You can find his first, on George Will and "engaged justices," here, and his second, on conservative support for nullification, here. -- MJWS)

**********

(Ed. note 2: Pro-union rallies were held around the country yesterday in a wonderful and much-needed show of support for Wisconsin's public-sector unions. We all need to stick together on this to counter not just what Gov. Walker and legislative Republicans are trying to do in Wisconsin but the broader threat to unions, and labour generally, both in that state and elsewhere, with conservatives seeking to undo the right to collective bargaining and more generally to hand more and more power back to the corporate overlords who run the Republican Party and who are so dominant within American conservatism. -- MJWS)

**********

By now, most everyone is familiar with the high political drama in the State of Wisconsin, where Democrats and labor continue to fend off attacks by Republicans to severely reduce the ability of workers to collectively bargain.

Only one parliamentary hurdle stands in the way of a Republican victory on collective bargaining: the Senate quorum requirement. Republicans need 3/5 of all state senators to be present during a legislative day to establish a quorum. There are currently 19 Republican senators and 14 Democratic senators, meaning they are one person shy of establishing a quorum to pass the bill reducing collective bargaining rights.

Under Rule 84 of the Wisconsin Senate rules:

The chief clerk shall immediately call the roll of the members, and note the absentees, whose names shall be read, and entered upon the journal in such manner as to show who are absent with leave and who are absent without leave. The chief clerk shall furnish the sergeant at arms with a list of those who are absent without leave, and the sergeant at arms shall forthwith proceed to find and bring in such absentees.

To avoid the strong arm of the sergeant at arms, Democrats fled from the State Capitol. Not to be deterred, the State Senate majority leader then sent the state police to the homes of the Wisconsin Democratic senators with instructions to compel such individuals to return to the Capitol. The police failed to locate a single Democratic senator, as all had reportedly left the state by the time the police arrived.

The Wisconsin Constitution expressly permits the Houses of Congress to pass rules to compel attendance by absentee legislators. Accordingly, the Wisconsin Senate rules do grant power to the sergeant at arms to compel Senate attendance of wayward senators. No other person or group, including the state police, has authority under the Senate rules to compel attendance.

The jurisdiction of the sergeant at arms is debatable. There is a strong argument that his power is limited to the confines of the Capitol grounds. Outside of the Capitol grounds, the sergeant at arms may be powerless to compel any action.

The debate is moot, however, because Senate Republicans did not use Capitol police under the direction of the sergeant at arms to compel attendance. Instead, they attempted to use the Wisconsin State Police. Unfortunately for Senate Republicans, there is no law or rule which would permit the state police to compel a Democratic senator to return to the Capitol Building. Actually, the analysis is even more concrete: The Wisconsin Constitution prohibits the arrest of any member of the Wisconsin Senate while the legislature is in session. As provided in Article 12, Section 15: 

Members of the legislature shall in all cases, except treason, felony and breach of the peace, be privileged from arrest; nor shall they be subject to any civil process, during the session of the legislature, nor for fifteen days next before the commencement and after the termination of each session.

The Democratic senators are not committing treason, a felony, or a breach of the peace by avoiding the Senate. There may be political ramifications (including a recall election, for example), but that's a far cry from asserting criminal ramifications.

Without the power to compel Democratic senators to return to the Capitol, the state police could find themselves in violation of Wisconsin criminal laws -- possibly including kidnapping. Under Section 940.31 of the Wisconsin Criminal Code, kidnapping occurs when a person:

By force or threat of imminent force carries another from one place to another without his or her consent and with intent to cause him or her to be... held to service against his or her will.

Each of those elements would seem satisfied if the state police were to force a Democratic senator to return to the Capitol to participate in a quorum call (i.e., service against his or her will).

If not kidnapping, perhaps false imprisonment, which is defined in Section 940.30, as an act which occurs when a person "intentionally confines or restrains another without the person's consent and with knowledge that he or she has no lawful authority to do so..."

Of course, if the police were to be found guilty of a crime, the State Senate Republicans would by extension be guilty of conspiracy in connection with that crime (see, e.g., Sections 939.05 and 939.31).

No, I don't expect any actual criminal charges to be filed, nor do I expect that a state police officer would actually arrest and transport a Democrat to the Capitol even if he found a Democratic Senator within Wisconsin (though I didn't expect the police to go looking, either).

That said, it's fairly ironic that the Democrats are often being cast as lawbreakers in this drama and are being forced to take political refuge in a neighboring state. People may disagree with what Democrats are doing. Some may even consider the Democrats' actions to be cowardly, petty, childish, abusive, dilatory, or, alternatively, brave, valiant, significant, dutiful, or a host of other adjectives. But unquestionably their acts are lawful -- and Republican efforts to compel Senate attendance by using the Wisconsin State Police are not.

(Cross-posted at The Fourth Branch.)

Fox hates the facts

By Michael J.W. Stickings

The right-wing anti-union thugs in Wisconsin are losing, with public opinion solidly against Gov. Scott Walker's efforts, but that isn't stopping Fox News from pressing its ideological case with reckless abandon -- indeed, it's only encouraging the network of Beck and Hannity and O'Reilly to distort the facts in a way that makes "fair and balanced" even more of a bullshit slogan. Actually, this isn't just distortion, it's out-and-out disregard, turning the facts on their head so as to advance the network's cause:

[On Tuesday], USA Today and Gallup released a new poll that found that a whopping 61 percent of Americans oppose efforts like those of Gov. Scott Walker (R-WI) to strip public sector unions of collective bargaining rights. The poll also found that only a third of Americans support such a policy, indicating that Walker is pandering to the far-right of the American electorate and is hardly representative of mainstream political thought in this country.

This morning, during a debate about the situation in Wisconsin and collective bargaining rights in general, the Fox News show Fox & Friends referenced the USA Today/Gallup poll. With incredible brazenness, the Fox hosts actually reversed the results of the poll in order to claim that two-thirds of Americans supported Wisconsin-style laws rather than opposed them.

A simple mistake, one that anyone could make? More like wishful thinking, but certainly much worse than that, because what we have here is Fox making a "mistake" that oh-so-conveniently backs up its partisan, ideological agenda. It may not have been the dimwitted hosts of that dimwitted show, but it was someone there, and it makes you wonder just how things work at this unabashed organ of Republican propaganda.

As Colbert noted last night, Brian Kilmeade, one of the dimwitted hosts, corrected himself, which was the responsible thing to do, but the damage had been done, embarrassment was at hand, and Fox News had proven once again that its priorities lie not with reporting the facts, or reporting and commenting on the news in any genuinely fair and balanced way, but in lying to advance its own political agenda.

Indiana official who called for "live ammunition" to be used in Wisconsin is fired

By Michael J.W. Stickings

So... did you hear about the conservative Indiana deputy attorney general who tweeted over the weekend that the police should "[u]se live ammunition" against the protesters in Egypt Bahrain Libya Wisconsin?

His name is Jeff Cox. And he's deservedly been fired.

As frightening as this is, it's somewhat refreshing when conservatives are this truly open about what they really believe and what they're really all about.

Like comparing environmentalists to Nazis and Osama bin Laden, referring to union members as "brownshirts," defending Indianapolis police for beating up a black kid, calling for killing and annihilation in Afghanistan as the only "sensible policy," etc.

Thanks, Jeff, you bloodthirsty fascist! 

Mother Jones has more.

The Daddy State

By Carl 

The latest news out of Wisconsin is pretty good for progressives and unions, although it could certainly reverse at any point.

Governor Scott Walker's attempt to bully unions and public sector workers into falling on the sword of fiscal responsibility for the mishaps of the rich and powerful has drawn some very intense scrutiny and to be frank, Gov. Walker has done a pretty horrendous job of justifying things. To claim that government sector pensions are out of proportion to the budget, then to exempt the largest pensions in the basket (the police and firefighter unions, many of whom can collect after only 20 years on the job... imagine retiring at full benefits at the age of 41), is one of the single most transparently ludicrous claims ever made by a public official.

See? The Teabaggers are just like any other politicians, only stupider and louder! This is good news for America. 

George Lakoff has it about right when he says, "Budget deficits are convenient ruses for destroying American democracy and replacing it with conservative rule in all areas of life."

Fascinating article, and I suggest you read it. Go on. I'll wait.

*Examining nails. Making fresh pot of coffee. Whistling "Wind Beneath My--*

Oh? You're back? Good. Let me go on...

The slow erosion, which is happening faster and faster as it gathers momentum, of what President Obama has called an ethic of excellence has been the underlying goal of Republicans since at least the days of Lee Atwater (who later renounced his assault on liberals and the liberal principles that created the greatest nation on earth) and likely since Ronald Reagan's inauguration as I highlighted yesterday.

Lakoff's suggestion that the conservative national image, of a patriarchy, is pretty valid and obviously wrong-headed, as any parent of any teen or anyone who studies the newspaper on a regular basis can tell you. You cannot change behaviour by diktat. You can enforce laws, true, but that's not a change in behaviour and if any behaviour does get changed, it's the behaviour that allowed the person to get caught in the first place (i.e. being too trusting of friends who rat one out).

Issue an edict (e.g., "You cannot smoke in here") and someone will start to probe it for loopholes if they want to smoke in there. Maybe they'll do it after hours, or use a can of Lysol to cover the scent. If they get caught, they'll just find other, more subtle ways to justify continuing the behavior you find offensive.

In other words, the claim that by some miracle, personal responsibility is enforceable is childish and fantastical. It simply will not happen. If we could trust people to act in the best interests of themselves while somehow not harming their neighbors flies in the face of millions of years of theft, greed, jealousy, anger, rage, fear, aggression, and passion.

All of which lie at the very heart of humanity. The evidence is inescapable: conservatives who believe this tripe have no business running a kindergarten class, much less a state or a nation. The very act of having to hide their original intent, to destroy the progressive "nanny state" by masking it with budget deficits and subsequent cuts... the Norquist Model, let's call it... ALONE speaks to the childishness and naivete of the whole venture.

As Governor Walker is, at great pain, finding out.

(Cross-posted to Simply Left Behind.)

In union, there is strength

By Carl 

I don't think I have to tell you where I stand on the issues unraveling in Wisconsin.

I am a union man. My father was union, blue-collar, working class. I'm union, in fact, three unions. "You don't get me, I'm part of the union," as the song goes.

There's a logic here that goes beyond greed (I'll get back to that in a minute). In early American history, companies were small. Certainly, none were of the size of the conglomeratic multinational corporations that control this nation today.

In early American history, it was likely that a line worker in a factory knew his boss. He may even have socialized with him on occasion, in church or some community function. Owners were in touch with their workers. They saw first hand the abject poverty many of them lived in. Many, if not most, acted appropriately.

Some did not, of course, else how would Dickens have made a career, British or not?

As corporations agglomerated and grew disproportionately to their communities, there really was nothing to stand in their way. The "company store" of song was very real: a corporation would hire entire towns, situate them in the company's thralls, pay them next to nothing, provide next to zero benefits, and then overcharge them for buying food.

Enter unions. As unions gathered strength in numbers, they were able to force companies to deal with the plight of their workers. In union, in unity, came strength. If the union advised its members to strike, they did. Usually, they'd win concessions that genuinely improved the lot, not just of their members, but of workers across the land.

You see, when you're the 800 lb gorilla in the room, people notice what you're up to. And when the 800 lb gorilla has to share more bananas to the troops of chimps who gather those bananas, other smaller gorillas realize they'll have to pony up or lose workers and therefore efficiencies and revenues.

Even if those gorillas aren't unionized.

A curious event happened in the 1980s, one that was a long time coming, but still surprising.

PATCO, the air traffic controllers union, went out on strike.

They struck the single biggest silverback in the world: the U.S. government. Of course, they broke a law doing it (most unions give up the right to strike with regards to public service employees.)

Ironically, they did this because they felt they would have the support of the president of the United States, Ronald Reagan, a) whom they endorsed and b) who was himself a former union president (the Screen Actors Guild).

Not so lucky: he promptly decertified them, effectively disbanding the union and firing the strikers.

That was the death knell for unions in America. Nevermind that our manufacturing base had been eroding steadily if slowly (and was about to accelerate rapidly ni the wake of the mergers and acquisition bubble of the 80s). Never mind that unions themselves had become pockets of corruption in many cases, greedy criminals running them, like Jimmy Hoffa.

The ill-advised PATCO strike probably was the single body blow that brought unions to their knees. If the government could fire them, then anyone would give it a try. And they did. And they succeeded, if only by filing bankruptcy (which is where the merger craze comes in) and dissolving the collective bargaining agreements as contracts null and void in the bankruptcy. Workers became mere creditors of the company, in effect.

But today, this week, this month, this year, we're starting to see the backlash of unions and union-minded people. The budget cuts that municipalities and states have been placing in effect has caused workers to shout "Basta!" and take to the streets. In Wisconsin, even the unions exempt from Governor Walker's edicts have stood shoulder to shoulder with their union peers.

In union comes strength. The firefighters remember the words of Pastor Reinhold Niebuhr: "Nothing we do, however virtuous, can be accomplished alone; therefore we are saved by love." 

Or to put it more prosaic terms, if they can screw with you, they can screw with me, so I stand with you now. 

(Cross-posted to Simply Left Behind.)

On Wisconsin

By Distributorcap

On, Wisconsin! On, Wisconsin!

Plunge right through that line!

Run the ball clear down the field,

A touchdown sure this time.

On, Wisconsin! On, Wisconsin!

Fight on for her fame

Fight! Fellows! - fight, fight, fight!

We'll win this game.

Finally, some people in America -- notably in Wisconsin -- are waking up to the fact that the Republicans are just a bunch of bullies who have absolutely NO idea how to govern. They sure know how to scare, intimidate, and stir the pot, but when it comes to governing, they're clueless. When people voted in these teabaggers and their Koch-bought slaves, they voted mostly out of frustration and anger. Now they are beginning to see the fruits of the votes: Scott Walker, John Kasich, Chris Christie, Rick Scott, and a whole slew of others who want nothing else but to bust unions and give MORE tax cuts to the wealthy.

It is class warfare to the Aynrand degree.

It is one thing to want to fix the financial mess (almost entirely created by the mass giveaway to corporations and the rich), but it is another thing to blatantly want to dismantle the workers and middle class of America as payback for the financing of electoral victories. That is the MO of Scott Walker. Any giveback from the wealthy, not so much in the MO.

I will say it here: Scott Walker is nothing short of a fascist. His no-negotiation stance leaves little choice for the opposition. Walker is also a greedy bastard on top of being a fascist. He wants to continue to cut taxes for the rich, his position against collective bargaining singles out the unions that did not support him, and he wants to allow the state to sell its assets under no-bid rules (to the Koch boys, of course). If any teabagger could actually read. I would think even they would be appalled by that one.

The populist selling of puritanical Ayn Randism and Milton Friedmanism as a political philosophy is continue to creep into the governance of America. One only has to look to Chile in the late 1970s and Argentina in 2001 as examples of what happens when free markets and self-sufficiency at the expense of the common interest runs amok. Since 1981, we have altered our economic system to make the corporate elite even more elite. With the Rand/Friedman/Reagan theory that it would trickle down, all that has happened 30 years later is that people like the Koch boys have kept that accumulated wealth and the rest are fighting for the scraps.

Wisconsin is finally showing America (and the media, which has portrayed the working class as a bunch of lemmings doing only as they are told) that peaceful protest can be effective and important (even if they don't win in the end). I can only hope that this type of "virus" does spread and does show up in 2012 at the ballot box OR in recall votes before then.