Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Too Hot for Swamp Gas' started by diehardgator1, Oct 5, 2013.
I don't give a rat's patootie about Reid. He is just another politician
No only a portion of the funds were federally funded.
These are parks the state of WI was already operating and paying for with state funds not federal funds so there is no shortfall
This has a very loud ring of grandstanding by Walker.....he has such a poor record on environmental issues. There's no way this man cares about keeping parks and recreational forests open to the public....his interests are selling off Wisconsin's natural resources to his corporate donors.
These are very short reads on Walker's position on WI's natural resources and forests:
While that might play well with a certain portion of the voters I doubt it garners him enough new votes in the future to make a difference. Just being against Obama is not as sound of a policy as some seem to think it is. There comes a time when the Reps are going to have to start showing the voters why they are really any better. Up to this point I haven't seen it.
If there is no federal funds involved why did you put it in your title and why does it say so in your link?
Just as with Bush in the past this is what happens when you try to make everything about Obama. The parts just don't fit.
IRS gonna pay a visit to those guys on Mt Rushmore.
I can almost assure under Bush these places would not be closed. Bush was to much of a patriot to let this happen. obama could have them open in 10 minutes if he wanted to the same as the WH tours. obama has his feelings hurt because he is not getting his way
So why is there a thread? Is it newsworthy that WI state parks aren't closed because of a federal government shutdown?
You really don't know that. It's conjecture at this point.
But be that as it may it's not the gist of what I posted about Bush. I'm saying being behind anything but Obama is no different than being behind anything but Bush. It takes little thought and doesn't accomplish much.
I said I can" almost" assume which means I am not positive
Aren't politicians elected to represent their constituents? I could give a damn about any politician toeing the party line. I like those that stand up for their constituents without regard to political consequences. I think in this case, Walker thinks the citizens of Wisconsin should have access to their state parks.
Anyone think that reasoning is wrong? Should the state shut them down in "solidarity" to the federal government?
True, that is what you said.
We read your posts. Walker challenged the public unions, saving the tax payers a ton of money on insurance, was recalled and won. That is why you don't like him. You are a union supporter.
But not every teacher is. My mom, sister and 2 aunts are all retired teachers. Mom was a 35 year vet. Not one of them ever joined the union. They despised the union. They were for the kids.
I'm glad you believe that because of the two of us it makes one that does. I don't necessarily believe in solidarity closing but neither do I believe this is anything but a political move.
So what if it is a political move. The residents of Wisconsin get to use their parks today. What is so wrong with that? And Walker thumbs his nose at Doofus and raises money for his next campaign. Good for him.
Reasoning is wrong big time. Walker has no regard for his constituents except for out of state corporate donors. He's destroying or selling off most of his constituents' natural resources.
He's not standing up for his constituents here.....he's grandstanding for his won political gain.....there's a difference.
Yes it is newsworthy because when others see that Gov Walker is not scared to stand up to obama others will to
So keeping state parks open for your residents is not standing up for your residents? I don't care what is motivation is, the parks are open today in Wisconsin. Is that a bad thing or a good thing?
Your liberalism blocks your ability to reason.