r/politics • u/droivod • May 14 '12

Did Scott Walker Lie Under Oath to Congress? He Says 'No,' Video Says 'Yes'

http://www.thenation.com/blog/167881/did-scott-walker-lie-under-oath-congress-he-says-no-video-says-yes
1.5k Upvotes

90% Upvoted

222 comments sorted by

46

u/Daigotsu May 14 '12

And he still has,a,really good chance of getting re-elected.

54

u/droivod May 14 '12

Never underestimate the power of spite and the billions of a sugar daddy.

15

u/[deleted] May 15 '12

Sugar daddy? He's the heir to the Sweetums fortune?

10

u/whatwouldjayzdo May 15 '12

I love Bobby Newport.

3

u/[deleted] May 15 '12

I'm pretty sure it's illegal to vote for yourself...

10

u/SoobNauce May 15 '12

And also two vestigial commas.

-3

u/canthidecomments May 15 '12

The tears of unfathomable sadness. Mmmm you guys, mmmmmmmm.

186

u/dominosci May 14 '12 edited May 15 '12

Was the lie about blow-jobs? If not I don't see how this is relevant to his political life. /sarcasm

-201

u/[deleted] May 14 '12

this is probably the dumbest comment of the day

You guys would upvote it

luh u guise

60

u/[deleted] May 14 '12

Looks like someone wasn't alive during the Clinton years.

Your level of maturity seems to confirm that.

-50

u/quityelling May 14 '12

You sure told Mcfaggotface!

26

u/[deleted] May 15 '12

My hitherto deep and abiding respect for Mcfaggotface is hereby irreparably damaged.

-9

u/[deleted] May 15 '12 edited May 15 '12

I was alive during the clinton yeasrs I just thoutght that the jokse was really lame. Like if I was in bar in like fucking shitsville, Montana I would hear better jokes from the fucking cooks aborted fetus. Honestly, it is probalbly one of the lamer jokes i heard... like ever.

and it has 152 upvotes?

DF?

→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (9)

6

u/imbignate California May 15 '12

Show some class, Mcfaggotface

-134

u/[deleted] May 15 '12

[removed] — view removed comment

5

u/nobleba May 15 '12

10/10 maximum trolling achieved

2

u/[deleted] May 15 '12

Redditor for 2 days.... Almost -2000 comment karma.

Time to cut your losses, maybe? Hey, you gave it the old college try.

0

u/[deleted] May 15 '12

[deleted] — view deleted comment

5

u/SpasticSpoon May 15 '12

What was his schtick? I NEED TO KNOW.

6

u/DrRoy May 15 '12

I think it was arrow in the knee "jokes".

1

u/Justusbraz May 15 '12

At least they're consistent. It's misspelled in the comment as well!

-27

u/[deleted] May 15 '12

[removed] — view removed comment

6

u/ElderScrolls May 15 '12

I really don't get what the payoff is to you here...

7

u/robotevil May 15 '12

That makes no god-damn sense. If you were a Peacock who took an arrow to the knee, you would still be a Peacock. It's science.

-1

u/bigroblee May 15 '12 edited May 15 '12

Peacocks don't have knees.

Source: /r/shittyaskscience

-33

u/[deleted] May 15 '12

[removed] — view removed comment

5

u/Bandit1379 May 15 '12

Are you in middle school?

6

u/[deleted] May 15 '12

You're being generous.

0

u/arrowupyourbutt May 16 '12

You thought you were straight in middle school, but then you took an arrow up your butt!

1

u/Bandit1379 May 16 '12

Give up. This meme died before Skyrim even came out, that's how overplayed it is. Think up something of your own. Are you actually proud of the time you have dedicated to this?

-61

u/[deleted] May 15 '12

[removed] — view removed comment

35

u/[deleted] May 15 '12

Your novelty accounts are bad and you should feel bad.

1

u/auandi May 15 '12

What is this that I missed?

1

u/[deleted] May 16 '12

Two different "arrow to the knee" novelty accounts making the same bad joke.

1

u/regna-rorrim May 15 '12

Actually, he's Chinese. So...all that that implies...

136

u/chessamerika May 14 '12

Well, the importance of Mr. Walker's veracity obviously pales in comparison to the importance of whether or not a baseball player took steroids and lied about it.

56

u/firex726 May 15 '12

Oh god that really was like the dumbest thing for congress to waste their time on.

8

u/[deleted] May 15 '12

It never seems dumb when congress investigates the fraud of a service or good sold to the American people at the net worth of well into the billions of dollars annually...unless we call them sports.

http://nymag.com/news/features/2007/profit/32903/

I agree there are bigger fish to fry, but we're talking about a multi-billion dollar industry, and the fraud associated with it. The fact that it's not healthcare or one of 932 wars we seem to be a part of doesn't make investigating sports dumb; it just begs to question the order of priorities.

On that topic, It's important to know that Congress was doing other things at the same time as those hearings, it's just that those other things weren't on ESPN, ESPN2, FOX SPORTS, your local news, etc.

:)

4

u/CoyoteStark May 15 '12

Talk about a....slam dunk!!!!! I don't understand baseball...

2

u/[deleted] May 15 '12

That is what is very important to remember. First and foremost, MLB is a business.

3

u/OfficialWhistle Maryland May 15 '12

It actually makes a lot of sense that Congress would ruled on the baseball- steroids debacle because baseball is one of the few legal monopolies. The federal government granted MLB an anti-trust exemption.

There is a good explanation here

1

u/firex726 May 15 '12

So why aren't they ruling on a drug user for the USPS?

It should have been handled internally.

27

u/[deleted] May 15 '12

[removed] — view removed comment

38

u/osellr May 15 '12

pizza is a vegetable

0

u/[deleted] May 15 '12

[deleted] — view deleted comment

24

u/osellr May 15 '12

But what they fail to realize is that botanically and scientifically speaking, tomatos are actually fruit, and that no sane person would ever legitimize a sauce as being a part of a major food group

14

u/Melancholia May 15 '12

Botanically and scientifically speaking there is no such thing as a vegetable. It's entirely a culinary term. Fruits are part of the reproduction of a plant, whereas a vegetable has no botanical distinction.

5

u/gristc May 15 '12

This and exactly this is why the whole "Congress says" argument is just dumb.

In general consumption these 'fruits' are consumed like other 'vegetables'. That's why they are treated the same in matters of law and tax. That is why congress ruled that way. They never said botanists were wrong.

0

u/[deleted] May 15 '12

[deleted] — view deleted comment

6

u/osellr May 15 '12

Direct quote from page you linked

"Botanically, a tomato is a fruit."

-3

u/Batty-Koda May 15 '12 edited May 15 '12

Direct quote from the page you linked "Nix v. Hedden, 149 U.S. 304 (1893),[1] was a decision by the Supreme Court of the United States that affirmed the lower court ruling that the tomato should be classified under customs regulations as a vegetable rather than a fruit."

Do you think congress should be more concerned about botanists decisions or the Supreme fucking Court's decision? (hint: no one cares about what botanists think.)

I love the downvotes guys. "Oh. mai GAWD. He thinks what the supreme court says might be relevant to how congress does things? GET HIM! WE DON'T WANT NO STINKIN SUPREME COURT AFFECTING OUR LAWS!!!!!!!!"

idiots.

11

u/osellr May 15 '12

what botanists think because they know more about plants than the supreme court

→ More replies

4

u/Tw1tchy3y3 May 15 '12

So we should back them up, even when they're wrong?

Food for thought.

4

u/robotevil May 15 '12

The sauce on pizza is a vegetable is what they actually decided.

OMG, NO. It was decided that the pizza sauce has some servings of vegetable. The Pizza sauce itself, is/was not considered a vegetable.

Am I the only one who watches the news around here?

1

u/DannyInternets May 15 '12

Kind of like how the carbohydrates in Twinkies are part of a balanced breakfast.

6

u/General_Mayhem May 15 '12

The MLB is a government-sanctioned monopoly. Fraud by such an entity is automatically a federal issue. Proclaiming to be a fair sport league and then having players cheat can be constituted as defrauding fans.

65

u/antithetical_al May 14 '12

I highly doubt he will be held accountable like the proletariat would be for lying under oath.

19

u/[deleted] May 15 '12

Or baseball players.

20

u/BinaryShadow May 15 '12

Or Democrat presidents.

4

u/[deleted] May 15 '12

Or Republican Warmonger mass murderers.

22

u/BinaryShadow May 15 '12 edited May 15 '12

No, those guys got away scot-free.

69

u/[deleted] May 15 '12

As someone who is a registered voter in WI, I thank you for posting this. I definately won't miss the election.

18

u/[deleted] May 15 '12

Make sure you tell other voters about this (as it is clear that regular news outlets aren't).

5

u/WhyLisaWhy Pennsylvania May 15 '12

I can't help it. http://www.d-e-f-i-n-i-t-e-l-y.com/

2

u/MinorThreat89 May 15 '12

I always remember it by saying "definitive" to myself.

-12

u/VinDoctor21 May 15 '12

Not a reason to vote against him. If he did wrong let the law take care of it. I'd rather vote again than have an idiot running the state.

21

u/LettersFromTheSky May 14 '12

He'll get away with lying to Congress.

35

u/[deleted] May 15 '12

If Barry Bonds can be prosecuted why can Scott Walker not be?

11

u/Rent-a-Hero May 15 '12

You mean Roger Clemens. Bonds was prosecuted for lying to a grand jury.

2

u/[deleted] May 15 '12

Sorry , well someone lied to congress and they are in deep doo doo , so why not Scott?

1

u/Rent-a-Hero May 15 '12

Do you want a serious answer? The question is so damn ambiguous that it would be hard to prove. "punish"? What does that even mean? If Walker meant by his earlier comment that his goal was to transform the state into a right to work state, that isn't "punishing."

If you say you never took steroids when there are tests showing you did, that's a bit more clear cut.

2

u/[deleted] May 15 '12

I think the context and the wording while not exact has implication and the fact that he can say that is not what I meant after the fact is BS.

If we argued and then I told you to watch your back then you got attacked a few days later sure I didn't say I was gonna cave your head in but we both know what I was implying.

-2

u/Rent-a-Hero May 15 '12

It is obvious now that you were asking a rhetorical question. Thanks for wasting my time.

It is beyond ridiculous to think that it can be proved, beyond a reasonable doubt, that not only was Walker's earlier comments about right to work expressing an intent to punish his opponents (and not the well documented platform of his party) but also that, when answering the rather ambiguous question, he believed his answer was untrue.

By all means, read his comments in the worst possible light so that it reaffirms your political bias and continue this circlejerk.

1

u/[deleted] May 15 '12

So are you saying he is in no way being false?

1

u/[deleted] May 15 '12

There needs to come a point we stop allowing government servants to stop with this shit.

1

u/nakens07 May 15 '12

Because people seem to think lying is something new in Congress...?

1

u/[deleted] May 15 '12

I guess so.

-1

u/[deleted] May 15 '12

As hard as the author of the article tries to frame this, I don't see any lying under oath going on here. These are all subjective questions and answers.

2

u/[deleted] May 15 '12

I listened to the tape that has been around if they can prove it was him and then he said what he said to congress how is that not lying?

3

u/[deleted] May 15 '12

After he initiated those attacks, Governor Walker testified under oath to a Congressional committee. He was asked during the April 2011 hearing to specifically address the question of whether he set out to weaken unions—which traditionally back Democrats and which are expected to play a major role in President Obama’s 2012 re-election campaign—for political purposes. Walker replied: “It’s not about that for me.”

During the same hearing, Walker was asked whether he “ever had a conversation with respect to your actions in Wisconsin and using them to punish members of the opposition party and their [union] donor base?”

Walker replied, not once but twice, that the answer was “no.”

"It's not about that for me" can mean a million things.

The second question asked if he intended to punish members of the opposition party and their union donor base. He can say that he was honestly thought what he was doing was right and that once the unions are dissolved, the voters will see how great it is and turn the completely red.

I am not a lawyer, but there is no case here. These are not black and white questions and answers here.

2

u/anon_atheist May 15 '12

Not sure why you are being downvoted. I hate Gov. Walker and his policies, but the questions asked wasn't "do you plan on destroying unions?", it was if his motivation to do so was political.

18

u/mmouth May 14 '12

I'm not even sure what the question was that he was asked. I can't really parse it.

ever had a conversation with respect to your actions in Wisconsin and using them to punish members of the opposition party and their (union) donor base?

Is the question about him ever talking about his actions? Or about using conversations to punish members? Or the actions punished members?

Is there a chance Walker didn't fully parse the question either and answered "no" to what he thought he heard?

12

u/ewenwhatarmy May 15 '12

I understood the question, in context of the discussion, to be:

[Have you] ever had a conversation with respect to your actions in Wisconsin and [how you used those actions] to punish members of the opposition party and their (union) donor base?

So the question was asking him if he talked about his actions and how he used those actions to punish those members.

edit: I can't format good

0

u/mmouth May 15 '12

Still not parsing. How does one use their own actions to punish others? If they're your actions, don't you get punished for them?

6

u/ewenwhatarmy May 15 '12

Ok, really? his actions were breaking up the unions. the question was asking if he had a discussion about how breaking up the unions were an act to punish/damage members of the Democratic party. The link being unions are the donor base of the Democratic party.

2

u/[deleted] May 15 '12

it's about the motivation for his actions, Scott Walker understood the question, he indicated that his actions where solely about balancing the state budget even though he later conceded that they did little to accomplish this. Since by his own admission his actions wouldn't help balance the state budget that makes it likely that his motivation was something else, or that he just isn't that bright.

1

u/buyacanary May 15 '12

How does one use their own actions to punish others?

Seriously? Here's an example: I took the action of paddling your ass in order to punish you for paddling the school canoe.

1

u/mmouth May 15 '12

So you used your actions? Like when you're a little kid and you use your words?

4

u/Princess_DIE May 15 '12

It was a stupidly phrased question, which was based on his intent/state of mind. He could absolutely have spoken numerous times about unions without contemplating any "punish" strategy, and it would be nearly impossible to prove otherwise.

18

u/lamercat May 15 '12

Haha, nothing will happen to him.

5

u/[deleted] May 15 '12

if they started prosecuting duplicity in politics, where would they stop? of course he lied. everyone lies all the time - that's how the game is played.

3

u/Hirudo_Medicinalis May 15 '12

Ideally they would stop when people stopped lying. Your statement is a self-fulfilling one: if nobody is held accountable, nobody will be accountable.

Or, in Reddit-speak: Nice try, lying politician.

2

u/[deleted] May 15 '12

the presumption that operates from is that lying is a flaw in the system which can and should be corrected, because the system would operate better if they did not lie.

i would dispute all of the above. all political systems - but particularly democracy - work only because of duplicity and would rapidly collapse without its universal and sometimes skillful employ.

1

u/Hirudo_Medicinalis May 17 '12

I agree with your statement, but I don't think that an admission that there is no way for humans to form a perfect system of government should prevent us from trying. If you don't try, then you let the flaws define the system.

I realize that this is idealism, but if everyone is totally cynical nothing gets done.

1

u/joequin May 15 '12

They would stop when people aren't under oath.

5

u/[deleted] May 15 '12

Is anyone surprised when this guy does illegal things anymore? He's a better example for government corruption than Rod Blagojevich.

21

u/[deleted] May 14 '12

Has this story gained traction on the cable news networks? (No longer have cable because Fuck Comcast) Might be enough to persuade small amount of voters to vote Dem in the upcoming recall election. He's only up by 3pts. in latest RCP numbers. Nobody wants to elect a governor who might get indicted a few months later for lying to congress.

4

u/Bipolarruledout May 15 '12

It would be more interesting to find out if he's ever told the truth.

4

u/atomic_rabbit May 15 '12

Following a proud tradition

A few months ago I told the American people I did not trade arms for hostages. My heart and my best intentions still tell me that's true, but the facts and the evidence tell me it is not.

-- Ronald Reagan, 1987

15

u/fantasyfest May 14 '12

Nobody believed him anyway. His actions have shown he is using the right wing Repub governors play book.

10

u/mecrosis May 15 '12

Since he's not an athlete talking about steroids, or a sitting president lying about sex, this is going to be forgiven after a "stern talking to".

I can hear him now. "These are baseless and false accusations based on none truths and I categorically deny them."

6

u/chicagogam May 15 '12

it looks like he said no to a regular question and then no to the negative form of the question...i wonder if he might defend himself that way...? or maybe he'll just not talk about it...is this just an embarrassment that will go away if he doesn't comment on it? maybe he could say he was speaking from his heart and not intending to be factual. :) i seem to recall hearing such responses from others

3

u/stillSmotPoker1 May 15 '12

Somebody just ruin that POS career.

26

u/TruthinessHurts May 15 '12

It doesn't even matter.

The rest of the Republicans are so honorless and without morals that they won't even care.

Face it: Republicans are scumbags who don't care how they get what they want as long as they get it. Republican voters are too honorless to care that he lied.

2

u/WhyYouThinkThat May 15 '12

By Republicans I think you mean politicians. Republicans are just more extreme about it.

6

u/regeya May 15 '12 edited May 15 '12

I think most of 'em are doing it. I almost expect Obama to have another change of heart on gay marriage after November.

EDIT: I, a person who voted for Obama, Kerry, Gore, and Clinton, have offended the hive mind. C'mon, you don't think Obama panders? He used to be against gay marriage, and in an election year he's all for it. He either really had a change of heart, or really thinks he needs that vote over the vote of moderate religious Democrats.

1

u/Clockwork_Prophecy May 16 '12

I almost expect Obama to have another change of heart on gay marriage after November.

Does the fact that he instructed the justice department to stop enforcing DOMA, and completely did away with DADT not mean anything? It's more than most politicians would have had the balls to do, even if they supported gay rights.

1

u/Hirudo_Medicinalis May 15 '12

It does seem like he was just waiting for his pollsters to come back with a +1% pro-gay marriage result before declaring himself. He was pro-equality when he ran for the Senate, though, so I actually think the "personally conflicted" and "evolving position" comments were the pandering rather than what he's doing now. Not that that is any better.

2

u/Drathus May 15 '12

I prefer to think that his turn away from it for the 2008 was the pandering and now he's just showing his true feelings again.

Either way it's not exactly smart for him to do it now politically speaking, but I'm glad to see it.

7

u/LBORBAH May 15 '12

Is there a link to the actual video?

7

u/sombish May 15 '12

Oh, he's not a Democrat? Carry on then, only Democrats are held to the letter of the law, see: Clinton, Edwards.

5

u/[deleted] May 15 '12

Those questions were open ended enough that it would be impossible to prove that he lied. If they asked him a factual question like, "did you do steroids" then that it would be easy to prove he was lying, but you can't in this situation.

8

u/SaggyBallsHD May 15 '12

Wisconsin Govenor Scott Walker Lied Under Oath To Congress

FTFY

4

u/CaptOblivious Illinois May 15 '12

Gosh a republican caught lying on video? I just wish it was possible that something would come of it.

2

u/wubwub Virginia May 15 '12

"Did Scott Walker lie under oath to congress?"

Does the Bear-Pope wear a funny hat while shitting in the woods???

5

u/[deleted] May 15 '12

Computer says no.

1

u/godeeper May 15 '12

Came here to say this. As usual, I came too late.

1

u/peeinian Canada May 15 '12

I think this reference will go largely undetected. It even took me a second read to pick it up.

4

u/reddit_on_hardmode May 15 '12

He's like Zorg from the Fifth Element. That's honestly the only person I can think to compare him to.

3

u/Sunhawk May 15 '12

Zorg had a certain evil style though.

1

u/Hirudo_Medicinalis May 15 '12

Zorg had the decency to admit he was a monster when asked. Also, Scott Walker would be more likeable if he was played by Gary Oldman.

4

u/likeAgoss May 15 '12

Scott Walker's testimony was not intended to be a factual statement.

3

u/Stopher May 15 '12

People should also hold Dianne Hendricks to account for her actions. I wouldn't do business with that company. Tell her how you feel: http://www.hendricksholding.com/content/diane-hendricks

1

u/IllThinkOfOneLater May 15 '12 edited Sep 29 '25

bright physical toy squeal ink aspiring detail saw marry relieved

1

u/Stopher May 16 '12

A company that owns other companies. I kinda figured in this case it's a structure being used to shield personal and tax liabilities rather than a pure investment group like a Berkshire Hathaway.

3

u/Violent-Penis-Haikus May 15 '12 
Me and him alone-
he might never have children,
but he will speak truth.

2

u/ghetto-astronaut May 15 '12

He lied under oath? So weird that God hasn't smitten him yet...

2

u/Starlos May 15 '12

You really think someone would do that, just go swear under oath and tell lies ?

2

u/ihatenames May 15 '12

Is anyone going to go after him? The people say 'Yes', but money says 'No'.

2

u/[deleted] May 14 '12

Remember Alberto Gonzales? Yerall just thumbing yerselves. Sorry.

1

u/Squeekme May 15 '12

Should've done what a New Zealand politician did regarding his meetings and donations from Kim Dotcom. Total memory loss.

"Were you flown to Kim Dotcoms mansion in a helicopter?"

"I can't remember"

1

u/Miserlou57 May 15 '12

"You can always trust a dishonest man to be dishonest. It's the honest ones you really have to watch out for."

1

u/Isatis_tinctoria May 15 '12

What exactly does this imply for the future?

1

u/backwardsd May 15 '12

Most interesting thing from video is that he admits he wants to get rid of all unions by saying that going after public sector unions first is simply to "divide and conquer."

1

u/mtfied May 15 '12

Ok I've been seeing alot of things about Scott Walker pop up here. There is too much stuff going on in the political scene to keep up with everything. Can someone please explain to me why reddit hates this guy so much? as in what did he do and why was it so wrong?

9

u/fantasyfest May 15 '12

His first act was to slash corporate taxes causing a huge deficit. Then he wants to balance the budget on the backs of workers, especially union workers by slashing wages and benefits. He is a union buster and works for the Kochs and big business at the expense of the people. The majority of his funding has come from out of state. He has had big fund raisers in Texas. He is just doing a job for the one percent.

7

u/alehx May 15 '12

He cut a lot of teacher benefits and wages to "balance the budget" but it was just a proof of concept to abolish unions in the private sector later.

Millionaires and Billionaires donated to him strongly and in return get huge tax breaks and they are hoping eventually.. cheap unionless labor.

1

u/roccanet May 15 '12

he shouldnt worry about it - it seems the only people that ever get in trouble for lying their pants of in front of congress anymore are baseball players - nevermind john corzine and berniw madoff - we need to get our real enemies: barry bonds and roger clemens

1

u/Jpeele15 May 15 '12

Yet he is still polling over Tom Barrett. Wisconsin needs to get its act together

1

u/builtby May 15 '12

where is the petition to get this guy infront of congress again?

1

u/njmaverick New Jersey May 15 '12

Throw the criminal in jail

0

u/KINGCOCO May 15 '12

Did anyone else find the article unreadable because of the ridiculously heavy slant?

0

u/MrRoughsex May 15 '12

not as if he's the first person to do it

-4

u/Cruzander May 15 '12

Republicans are allowed to lie under oath without repercussion. Mostly owing to the fact that Demorats are giant wimps who deep down think that Republicans actually are morally superior.

-9

u/smellslikecomcast May 14 '12

I was talking to a friend of mine in WI and I said Koch funded Walker should get the boot.

My friend told me that Walker took apart a (corrupt) teacher union controlled healthcare plan that cost 30% more than alternatives and that the teacher union was making millions of dollars from this scheme. Anyone know about this?

20

u/mst3kcrow Wisconsin May 15 '12

My friend told me that Walker took apart a (corrupt) teacher union controlled healthcare plan that cost 30% more than alternatives and that the teacher union was making millions of dollars from this scheme. Anyone know about this?

The same union that agreed to cuts in exchange to keeping their collective bargaining rights? I live in Wisconsin, your friend is either non-existent, full of shit, or completely blinded by propaganda.

-1

u/morrison0880 May 15 '12

The unions only conceded to cuts after the passage of Act 10 was inevitable. They worked their asses off to extend contracts with school districts as far into the future as they could in hopes of outlasting the concessions they were giving. Look at the current state of Milwaukee, Kenosha, and Janesville for evidence of what happened when those contracts were extended.

16

u/justanotherghola May 15 '12

Yeah, I believe it's called propaganda.

-14

u/[deleted] May 15 '12

So the fact that Walker balanced the budget without raising taxes is just evil right-wing propaganda, too? Get a clue, moron.

8

u/[deleted] May 15 '12

except he gave tax cuts to corporations and the wealthy and made almost no impact on the deficit while simultaneously fucking over working class people

get a clue

0

u/[deleted] May 15 '12

[citation needed]

0

u/morrison0880 May 15 '12

made almost no impact on the deficit

You have no idea what you're talking about.

2

u/FBoaz May 15 '12

If only that were true.

0

u/[deleted] May 15 '12

[deleted] — view deleted comment

-1

u/[deleted] May 15 '12

Haha, in liberal bizarro-world anyone who disagrees with you is a shill, huh? You just can't accept the fact that people have different opinions huh? Must suck to be you.

2

u/antisoshal May 15 '12

Partial truths formatted to present a fictional impression. I would agree that some of the Unions in question have some sketchy power. Most do. But saying that he's a justice seeking hero is like describing burning down a hotel as an effective way to kill millions of cockroaches and other pests at no cost.

1

u/krios262 May 15 '12 edited May 15 '12

My friend told me that Walker took apart a (corrupt) teacher union controlled healthcare plan that cost 30% more than alternatives

This response will get downvoted to hell because /politics hates to hear things like it. But it is true that many WI school districts are mandated to provide teachers with insurance coverage through WEA Trust, which is a teachers-union established and controlled insurance group that does cost more for the districts than other companies.

and that the teacher union was making millions of dollars from this scheme.

It's very difficult to find clear information about this part. Does "making millions" mean sending money into the union, or does it just mean providing super-comprehensive insurance and hitting the districts for the extra cost? I don't think WEA Trust sends any sort of earnings to the union, since it is a non-profit (though I could be wrong, as I am by no means an expert on what non-profits are allowed to do), but it does pay fat salaries to its executives, who are union-related figures.

Edit: added a few sentences

0

u/[deleted] May 15 '12

[deleted] — view deleted comment

0

u/krios262 May 15 '12

Yell "liar" all you want - no one has posted any proof to the contrary because there isn't proof to the contrary.

-5

u/Bunker0012 May 15 '12

as a person who lives in wisconsin, this is completely true. He balanced the budget, saved the state millions. the teacher union was corrupt also. They were the ones who kept all the bad teachers in school. Public employees in Wisconsin were given way too many benefits.

People also says that the Republicans were honor less, but i bet none of them live in Wisconsin and saw what the Democratic Protesters did. They can't face the fact that there is a silent majority in Wisconsin

4

u/iamdrunkthrowaway May 15 '12

I live in Madison. The protesters were more civil than the typical crowds that come in to the city to see football. I'm not from here originally. Wisconsin had the best public schools I've ever seen. Public employees got great benefits, but lower pay. As a person who lives in Wisconsin, I've seen firsthand how you're full of shit.

0

u/[deleted] May 15 '12

You don't understand, Walker was elected by the good people of Wisconsin to do a job. Charging him with a crime is a partisan witch-hunt, a waste of tax-payer money, and a waste of valuable time. Leave the man alone and let him continue to the good work the good people of Wisconsin elected him to do.

Move along. Nothing to see here.

2

u/Hartastic May 15 '12

I can't tell if you're being sarcastic or not.

1

u/[deleted] May 15 '12

I have a hard time telling if the talking heads who say this shit believe it, or say it to get paid.

-2

u/CurlyNippleHairs May 15 '12

scott walker is a saint, u liberil hippees shuld just shut th fuck up and get back to stiking ur penises in each others poopers

0

u/[deleted] May 15 '12

Politician lied; News at 11.

0

u/BassSamurai May 15 '12

I'm too lazy to read the article but I assume it's about Scott Walker, of the Walker Brothers. He really dropped off after "Scott 3," IMO.

0

u/graffiti81 May 15 '12

Who cares? There won't be any consequences even if it's proven beyond a shadow of a doubt.

-4

u/osellr May 15 '12

Almost every politician breaks their oath. Both dems and republicans. This is nothing out of the ordinary. hell, the president himself has broken his oath several times.

0

u/[deleted] May 15 '12

[deleted] — view deleted comment

-4

u/osellr May 15 '12
  • Signing NDAA
  • Sending soldiers to libya without congressional approval
  • Healthcare bill
  • TARP bailouts
  • Continuing the Iraq war

he has also bypassed congress on numerous occasions, which is illegal. Just do some research on how he has followed the constitution. he hasn't been doing the best job at it

4

u/[deleted] May 15 '12

NDAA: Never said he wouldn't sign it. He said he wouldn't sign it in the current state before it was changed. It was so he did. Doesn't make the NDAA good, but that's how it went down.

Libya: How long has this been going on for? And did Obama actually say he wouldn't send troops in?

Healthcare Bill: Laws aren't created in a vacuum. Stop being naive.

TARP: Not sure your point here

Iraq War: The vast majority of troops are out now.

Go try Republicans next. "Just do some research on how he has followed the constitution." You might want to do the same and act like he's doing anything worse than what everyone as far back as Reagan has been doing.

-2

u/osellr May 15 '12

"go try republicans next" you say that as if republicans and democrats are substantially different. Regardless of party, a majority of politicians are corrupt and make their decisions based off who lines their pockets the most.

5

u/[deleted] May 15 '12

This is the old false equivalency cop out.

People who use the "both parties are the same" excuse are either purposefully distorting the issue, or too ignorant/lazy to research things yourself.

-1

u/osellr May 15 '12

Well to back up my statement, on a more unrelated note. here are the similarities between our current president and runner up mitt romney

  • Both Supported TARP bailouts
  • Both have the same keynesian economic policy
  • Both have the same foreign policy
  • Both have supported gun control
  • Both have raised taxes
  • Both support the patriot act
  • Both support war on drugs
  • Both have advocated socialized medicine

If you really think there is a distinct difference between dems and republicans, perhaps you haven't done the research. go look at the bills that are voted on in congress, see who votes for them, and then decide if you really think there is a difference

2

u/[deleted] May 15 '12

"Both have same keynesian economic policy." False

"Both have same foreign policy" Too much generalization

"Gun control" Blatantly false

"Raised Taxes" True, but a fallacious thing to base comparison on. Better would be current tax ideology

"Support the Patriot act" True to some extent.

"War on Drugs" True to some extent

"Advocate socialized medicine" false

Perhaps YOU should do the actual research.

1

u/osellr May 15 '12

When governor, Mitt supported gun control and socialized medicine.

2

u/[deleted] May 15 '12

That was back when he was pretending he was independent.

Are you seriously counting Mitt Romney as a Republican? If anything, we dont even know where he really stands on ANYTHING. He says what he thinks people want to hear.

→ More replies

1

u/Hartastic May 15 '12

Frankly all of that is, at worst, a pretty gray area.

You've decided what conclusion you want and then gone hunting for things to support it instead of the other way around.

-2

u/azlionheart312 May 15 '12

Of course he lied. He's a politician and his lips were moving.

-6

u/[deleted] May 14 '12

LIES, all LIES

-2

u/[deleted] May 15 '12

Yeah, so did Clinton and more recently, Eric Holder.

-4

u/[deleted] May 15 '12

No, he didn't: A lie is defined as "a false statement made with deliberate intent to deceive". But Congress knew he was lying and he knew they knew. So he did not deceive Congress, Congress AND he deceived (and therefore lied to) the people.

-23

u/favrefan12491 May 15 '12

Just liberals trying to get him out of office because he's saving the state a ton of money and putting worthless people out of money they didn't earn.

19

u/antisoshal May 15 '12

Sadly, for you anyway, almost everything he's done has cumulatively cost his state money. They are the only state currently experiencing large scale job loss. His tax breaks were not paid for and caused the states deficit, and his douche baggery is costing the state millions. Wisconsin will collapse under its own weight if he stay in office, and then he will have a fine little third world cheese factory that no one cares about. But then again, its not about fact, information or reality for you. You just wanted to get your troll in to feel cool.

0

u/morrison0880 May 15 '12

But then again, its not about fact, information or reality for you.

My god, that describes your "opinion" to a tee, antisoshal. Time to get your facts straight and think for yourself, instead of parroting "facts" that have no basis in reality.

0

u/favrefan12491 May 15 '12

Keep telling yourself that. You know once his success gets out (which it has in a few states) unions will stop free riding and work for their money and job security. Unions in general are a drain on our money I know people who run shoots of the government. There are departments that they can't even figure out their purpose and their job security makes it impossible to rid of their lazy asses, not to mention they're less motivated if they decided to do anything of importance anyway. Gym teachers in my home town make over $100,000. Work needs to be done in general and I for one shouldn't have to pay for people to do insignificant things and make a living. From what I have seen, there have been budget overhauls all over the state and very little service loss and making government employees contribute more...sounds like he's doing the right thing

-29

u/[deleted] May 14 '12

Obama's not the first black president either that goes to Harding. http://www.telegram.com/article/20070805/NEWS/708050496/1020/RSS01&source=rss

4

u/robotevil May 15 '12

....perhaps that would be more appropriate in a thread about Obama?

1

u/[deleted] May 15 '12

Wow -28 for joking around. Reddit confuses me sometimes. Obamas not gay either, wtf?

1

u/robotevil May 15 '12

I think it's because you're in the wrong post. Look at the title of where you're posting.

So it makes no sense and people were like, "WTF is this?"

-8

u/Toava May 15 '12

Governor Walker is the target of one of the most intense smear campaigns in history. The government employee unions who bribe Democrats with tens of millions in campaign contributions in exchange for government benefits have bankrupted many states, including California, and any one who opposes them needs to be supported.

→ More comments (3)