Associated Press: SB5 Goes Down as voters Reject Anti-union Measure!

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Nov 09, 2011 2:17 AM GMT
    The AP just called it for the workers. Anti-union bill is toast!

    So happy. Scott Walker's next!
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Nov 09, 2011 2:18 AM GMT
    Yes yes yes. The conservaposse must be in hysterics!!
  • mke_bt

    Posts: 707

    Nov 09, 2011 2:19 AM GMT

    I'm sure the socialist-nazi-pedophile-union thugs rigged the election.
    (in before sb).
  • mke_bt

    Posts: 707

    Nov 09, 2011 2:23 AM GMT

    Oh yeah, Kentucky also re-elected their Democrat Gov. More shenanigans from middle of the road Kentucky Democrats.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Nov 09, 2011 2:25 AM GMT
    southbeach1500 saidHooray! Hooray!

    Let's hope this catches on and next in line will be unionization of all non-profit fundraising companies located in New York City!


    Sure. Why not? It wouldn't effect me anyway as I'm management.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Nov 09, 2011 2:40 AM GMT
    southbeach1500 said
    Christian73 said
    southbeach1500 saidHooray! Hooray!

    Let's hope this catches on and next in line will be unionization of all non-profit fundraising companies located in New York City!


    Sure. Why not? It wouldn't effect me anyway as I'm management.


    Except when "the workers" go on strike because you "1%" in management won't give in to their demands.

    Goodbye fundraising and goodbye cushy non-profit management job because non-profit fundraising company goes out of non-profit fundraising business.


    That's a terrible analogy. I guess you're getting desperate. Meanwhile, they just called it for same-day voter registration in Maine (yay! Liberals) and it looks like we might win the embryo personhood amendment as well in MS.

    Bad day for Republicans!
  • creature

    Posts: 5197

    Nov 09, 2011 2:57 AM GMT
    Thanks for the update, Christian.

    I was reading the comment section on HuffingtonPost about this, and one guy mentioned how he arrived early at the polls, only to be 5th in line. It turns out the people ahead of him were teachers who wanted to vote before going off to work.

    This is great news.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Nov 09, 2011 4:48 AM GMT
    southbeach1500 said
    Christian73 said
    That's a terrible analogy. I guess you're getting desperate. Meanwhile, they just called it for same-day voter registration in Maine (yay! Liberals) and it looks like we might win the embryo personhood amendment as well in MS.

    Bad day for Republicans!


    Clearly Obama will coast to re-election and the Democrats will increase their control of the Senate and retake the House in 2012.

    Not at all surprising, when "the 99%" are Democrats and only "the 1%" are Republicans.


    Actually, this puts Ohio squarely in play. Maybe not coast but there's now an infrastructure in Ohio that turned out more votes against SB 5 then elected Kasich. That's significant.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Nov 09, 2011 4:54 AM GMT
    And notice how 66% of the voters voted against Obamacare (Issue 3) being thrown at them. It was the biggest landslide of the night. The people don't want it. Obama may have just lost Ohio tonight.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Nov 09, 2011 4:57 AM GMT
    CHRISTOPHER34 saidAnd notice how 66% of the voters voted against Obamacare (Issue 3) being thrown at them. It was the biggest landslide of the night. The people don't want it. Obama may have just lost Ohio tonight.


    icon_lol.gif Actually, exit polls suggest that most voters didn't even know what issue three was in Ohio.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Nov 09, 2011 5:11 AM GMT
    Christian73 said
    CHRISTOPHER34 saidAnd notice how 66% of the voters voted against Obamacare (Issue 3) being thrown at them. It was the biggest landslide of the night. The people don't want it. Obama may have just lost Ohio tonight.


    icon_lol.gif Actually, exit polls suggest that most voters didn't even know what issue three was in Ohio.


    Obama lost Ohio tonight, get over it. The people dont want mandated health care thrown at them.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Nov 09, 2011 6:11 AM GMT
    CHRISTOPHER34 said
    Christian73 said
    CHRISTOPHER34 saidAnd notice how 66% of the voters voted against Obamacare (Issue 3) being thrown at them. It was the biggest landslide of the night. The people don't want it. Obama may have just lost Ohio tonight.


    icon_lol.gif Actually, exit polls suggest that most voters didn't even know what issue three was in Ohio.


    Obama lost Ohio tonight, get over it. The people dont want mandated health care thrown at them.


    SB - Stop this. You're embarrassing yourself.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Nov 09, 2011 1:06 PM GMT
    Christian73 said
    CHRISTOPHER34 said
    Christian73 said
    CHRISTOPHER34 saidAnd notice how 66% of the voters voted against Obamacare (Issue 3) being thrown at them. It was the biggest landslide of the night. The people don't want it. Obama may have just lost Ohio tonight.


    icon_lol.gif Actually, exit polls suggest that most voters didn't even know what issue three was in Ohio.


    Obama lost Ohio tonight, get over it. The people dont want mandated health care thrown at them.


    SB - Stop this. You're embarrassing yourself.


    Christian your a good liberal you know how to ignore the facts.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Nov 09, 2011 9:05 PM GMT
    CHRISTOPHER34 said
    Christian73 said
    CHRISTOPHER34 said
    Christian73 said
    CHRISTOPHER34 saidAnd notice how 66% of the voters voted against Obamacare (Issue 3) being thrown at them. It was the biggest landslide of the night. The people don't want it. Obama may have just lost Ohio tonight.


    icon_lol.gif Actually, exit polls suggest that most voters didn't even know what issue three was in Ohio.


    Obama lost Ohio tonight, get over it. The people dont want mandated health care thrown at them.


    SB - Stop this. You're embarrassing yourself.


    Christian your a good liberal you know how to ignore the facts.


    The fact is your right-wing douche baggery got trounced last night. I'd be hiding behind a fake account if that happened to the people and issues I support.
  • musclmed

    Posts: 3274

    Nov 09, 2011 9:31 PM GMT
    I am all for ballot measures that allow direct democracy.
    In this case the people and local governments will have to decide how to pay for it.

    Collective Bargaining is not a "right" if you are a public employee. If Ohio wants it they can have it.

    If the people of Ohio want to raise taxes to pay for it that's fine by me. Just don't ask for a handout from the Federal Government to pay for it. They should figure out how to do that themselves.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Nov 09, 2011 9:33 PM GMT
    musclmed saidI am all for ballot measures that allow direct democracy.
    In this case the people and local governments will have to decide how to pay for it.

    Collective Bargaining is not a "right" if you are a public employee. If Ohio wants it they can have it.

    If the people of Ohio want to raise taxes to pay for it that's fine by me. Just don't ask for a handout from the Federal Government to pay for it. They should figure out how to do that themselves.


    Collective bargaining is a recognized right by the UN Declaration of Human Rights to which the US is a signatory.
  • musclmed

    Posts: 3274

    Nov 09, 2011 9:38 PM GMT
    Christian73 said
    musclmed saidI am all for ballot measures that allow direct democracy.
    In this case the people and local governments will have to decide how to pay for it.

    Collective Bargaining is not a "right" if you are a public employee. If Ohio wants it they can have it.

    If the people of Ohio want to raise taxes to pay for it that's fine by me. Just don't ask for a handout from the Federal Government to pay for it. They should figure out how to do that themselves.


    Collective bargaining is a recognized right by the UN Declaration of Human Rights to which the US is a signatory.


    You can let us know when that applies to the United States of America. Foreign treaties have no force of law within the US.

    The term “treaty” as a matter of U.S. constitutional law denotes international matters. http://www.state.gov/s/l/treaty/tif/index.htm icon_wink.gif

    Try going to court and citing a treaty and see how far that takes you. Unless you are addressing some international matter, it means nothing.

    You need to get past the inconvenience of Article VI of the US constitution says the Constitution is the Supreme Law of the Land. Treaties can have force of law, only when there is no conflict with current law or precedent.
    The Supreme Court and Federal courts have ruled in this area. So no treaty can trump that.

    Many states and the Federal government do not extend Collective Bargaining rights to public employees.

    Sorry nice try though.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Nov 09, 2011 10:17 PM GMT
    The Liberals will always celebrate when the Union Bosses get richer and theres more dead fetuses in garbage bags.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Nov 09, 2011 10:25 PM GMT
    CHRISTOPHER34 saidThe Liberals will always celebrate when the Union Bosses get richer and theres more dead fetuses in garbage bags.


    Sadly, you didn't end up in said garbage bag.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Nov 09, 2011 10:31 PM GMT
    musclmed said
    Christian73 said
    musclmed saidI am all for ballot measures that allow direct democracy.
    In this case the people and local governments will have to decide how to pay for it.

    Collective Bargaining is not a "right" if you are a public employee. If Ohio wants it they can have it.

    If the people of Ohio want to raise taxes to pay for it that's fine by me. Just don't ask for a handout from the Federal Government to pay for it. They should figure out how to do that themselves.


    Collective bargaining is a recognized right by the UN Declaration of Human Rights to which the US is a signatory.


    You can let us know when that applies to the United States of America. Foreign treaties have no force of law within the US.

    The term “treaty” as a matter of U.S. constitutional law denotes international matters. http://www.state.gov/s/l/treaty/tif/index.htm icon_wink.gif

    Try going to court and citing a treaty and see how far that takes you. Unless you are addressing some international matter, it means nothing.

    You need to get past the inconvenience of Article VI of the US constitution says the Constitution is the Supreme Law of the Land. Treaties can have force of law, only when there is no conflict with current law or precedent.
    The Supreme Court and Federal courts have ruled in this area. So no treaty can trump that.

    Many states and the Federal government do not extend Collective Bargaining rights to public employees.

    Sorry nice try though.


    First, it's not a treaty, so everything you just rambled is not applicable.

    Second, an American, Eleanor Roosevelt, was a drafter of the Declaration.

    Third, the Declaration is considered a pinnacle of International Law (which supersedes National law as Federal law trumps state law - think Nuremberg Trials) and "is binding on all member states of the United Nations."

    More here:

    "While not a treaty itself, the Declaration was explicitly adopted for the purpose of defining the meaning of the words "fundamental freedoms" and "human rights" appearing in the United Nations Charter, which is binding on all member states. For this reason the Universal Declaration is a fundamental constitutive document of the United Nations. Many international lawyers, in addition, believe that the Declaration forms part of customary international law and is a powerful tool in applying diplomatic and moral pressure to governments that violate any of its articles. The 1968 United Nations International Conference on Human Rights advised that it "constitutes an obligation for the members of the international community" to all persons."

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Nov 09, 2011 10:39 PM GMT
    Christian73 said
    CHRISTOPHER34 saidThe Liberals will always celebrate when the Union Bosses get richer and theres more dead fetuses in garbage bags.


    Sadly, you didn't end up in said garbage bag.


    Typical Liberal Response.
  • musclmed

    Posts: 3274

    Nov 09, 2011 10:44 PM GMT
    Christian73 said
    musclmed said
    Christian73 said
    musclmed saidI am all for ballot measures that allow direct democracy.
    In this case the people and local governments will have to decide how to pay for it.

    Collective Bargaining is not a "right" if you are a public employee. If Ohio wants it they can have it.

    If the people of Ohio want to raise taxes to pay for it that's fine by me. Just don't ask for a handout from the Federal Government to pay for it. They should figure out how to do that themselves.


    Collective bargaining is a recognized right by the UN Declaration of Human Rights to which the US is a signatory.


    You can let us know when that applies to the United States of America. Foreign treaties have no force of law within the US.

    The term “treaty” as a matter of U.S. constitutional law denotes international matters. http://www.state.gov/s/l/treaty/tif/index.htm icon_wink.gif

    Try going to court and citing a treaty and see how far that takes you. Unless you are addressing some international matter, it means nothing.

    You need to get past the inconvenience of Article VI of the US constitution says the Constitution is the Supreme Law of the Land. Treaties can have force of law, only when there is no conflict with current law or precedent.
    The Supreme Court and Federal courts have ruled in this area. So no treaty can trump that.

    Many states and the Federal government do not extend Collective Bargaining rights to public employees.

    Sorry nice try though.


    First, it's not a treaty, so everything you just rambled is not applicable.

    Second, an American, Eleanor Roosevelt, was a drafter of the Declaration.

    Third, the Declaration is considered a pinnacle of International Law (which supersedes National law as Federal law trumps state law - think Nuremberg Trials) and "is binding on all member states of the United Nations."

    More here:

    "While not a treaty itself, the Declaration was explicitly adopted for the purpose of defining the meaning of the words "fundamental freedoms" and "human rights" appearing in the United Nations Charter, which is binding on all member states. For this reason the Universal Declaration is a fundamental constitutive document of the United Nations. Many international lawyers, in addition, believe that the Declaration forms part of customary international law and is a powerful tool in applying diplomatic and moral pressure to governments that violate any of its articles. The 1968 United Nations International Conference on Human Rights advised that it "constitutes an obligation for the members of the international community" to all persons."




    I know you think it is so, But simply INTERNATIONAL LAW HAS NO APPLICATION WHEN THERE IS GOVERNING CONSTITUTIONAL LAW.

    I did not ramble. And again you devolve into nasty mouth comments when your ideas do not match up with facts. Did you even read the State Departments interpretation of what a Treaty is and International law in the link?

    Last, it doesn't matter if George Washington drafted it. Article VI of the constitution makes the Supreme Court and the Constitution the supreme law of the land.

    Last if you are saying "it isnt a treaty" it has even LESS weight.

    International bodies are not "Super Congress" and we do not live in the E.U.

    You certainly can believe that collective bargaining is a right, but that is very much different to say its written in Law that would have any meaning in the United States. To state anything else is intellectually dishonest. Especially as you know, the courts have answered this question. That is precisely why in many states this is a area that can be legislated. Second, it is also why Wisconsin still has its prohibition on collective bargaining for public employees.

    Is this all some BIG MISTAKE, should we all have been waiting for Christian73 to remind us "this is a legal right"?


    Treaties as law:

    As a matter of domestic law, treaties – like statutes – must meet the requirements of the Constitution; no treaty provision may have force of law in the United States if it conflicts with the Constitution. Reid v. Covert, 354 U.S. 1 (1957). Thus, the United States is unable to accept a treaty obligation which limits constitutionally protected rights, as in the case of Article 20 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, which restricts the freedom of speech and association guaranteed under the First Amendment to the Constitution.

    Consequently, when deliberating on ratification of a treaty concerning the rights of individuals, Congress must give careful consideration to the specific provisions of the treaty and to the question of consistency with existing State and federal law, both constitutional and statutory. Where treaty provisions conflict with the Constitution, the United States makes reservations to them simply because neither the President nor Congress has the power to override the Constitution. In some cases, it has been considered necessary for the United States to state its understanding of a particular provision or obligation in a treaty, or to make a declaration as to how it intends to apply that provision or meet that obligation.


    Again nice try.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Nov 09, 2011 10:48 PM GMT
    musclmed said
    I know you think this. But simply INTERNATIONAL LAW HAS NO APPLICATION WHEN THERE IS GOVERNING CONSTITUTIONAL LAW.

    SORRY, it doesn't matter if George Washington drafted it. Article VI of the constitution makes the Supreme Court and the Constitution the supreme law of the land.

    Last if you are saying "it isnt a treaty" it has even LESS weight.

    Again nice try.


    Really? So if Iran says I want to build as gazillion nuclear weapons what would our response be?

    What was the rationale for going into Iraq? International law.

    How have sanctions been applied to rouge nations?

    Law is law. You don't get to pick and choose the parts of it you like.

    PS: Article 4 applies to member states, not the International community. icon_rolleyes.gif
  • musclmed

    Posts: 3274

    Nov 09, 2011 11:01 PM GMT
    Christian73 said
    musclmed said
    I know you think this. But simply INTERNATIONAL LAW HAS NO APPLICATION WHEN THERE IS GOVERNING CONSTITUTIONAL LAW.

    SORRY, it doesn't matter if George Washington drafted it. Article VI of the constitution makes the Supreme Court and the Constitution the supreme law of the land.

    Last if you are saying "it isnt a treaty" it has even LESS weight.

    Again nice try.


    Really? So if Iran says I want to build as gazillion nuclear weapons what would our response be?

    What was the rationale for going into Iraq? International law.

    How have sanctions been applied to rouge nations?

    Law is law. You don't get to pick and choose the parts of it you like.

    PS: Article 4 applies to member states, not the International community. icon_rolleyes.gif


    I suggest writing a legal brief and see how far that goes. The response above shows you lack a fundamental understanding of the Separation of Powers, what a law is and how legal precedent is adopted.

    Iran is not in the United States, it doesnt have a right to build anything HERE
    So why is this analogous?
    I am not sure how any military action has any bearing on legal rights.

    Simply we cannot give away in a treaty what is incorporated into law in the United States.

    If the Courts here found it to be a legal right, then and only then would it matter. To this date this is NOT SO.

    Treaties and international agreements are ratified by the Senate and the President. Only powers given to them by the Constitution can be contemplated.

    I would agree, Law is Law. Know that we are governed by our OWN SOVEREIGN law. It cannot be given away or overriden by international agreement.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Nov 09, 2011 11:10 PM GMT
    mke_bt said
    I'm sure the socialist-nazi-pedophile-union thugs rigged the election.
    (in before sb).

    You left out Fascists. Remember, according to the conversaposse here, Democrats are liberals, socialists, communists, and fascists all at once, a definitional impossibility that doesn't seem to phase them.

    Oh, and don't forget thugs, their latest buzzword they've all taken up. That's to disguise the real thuggery of the gun-totting Teabaggers who intimidate others at the point of a gun. You do know the conservaposse has their own invitation-only non-RJ site where they go to rehearse these coordinated attacks against the rest of us?