See what others have said

Note from Michelle: This section is for comments from michellemalkin.com's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that I agree with or endorse any particular comment just because I let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with my terms of use may lose his or her posting privilege.

Comments

1. #101
   On March 18th, 2011 at 5:54 pm, BayouKiki said:

   Let me make one thing clear early on here: The judge didn’t strike down anything. The judge issued a temporary restraining order prohibiting whoever is responsible for doing so from publishing the law — no doubt one of the steps that needs to be taken before it can become law.

   What is really interesting to me as someone involved in the legal profession is how or why this just would have issued a TRO. TROs are reserved for situations where irreparable injury would be suffered before there could be a hearing on a preliminary injunction and the hearing on the preliminary injunction is held long before the trial on the permanent injunction. I find it very difficult to believe that there was any irreparable harm that would be suffered before a hearing could be held (TROs are done ex parte, meaning without a hearing). So regardless of the merits of the underlying action, why was the TRO needed? I doubt that it was.

   I wish a Wisconsin attorney who knows what they’re talking about would ring in on the notice issue. I also had heard that the normal notice rules were suspended when in special session as they were but I don’t have the time or the want-to to do the research myself. I do believe, however, that the action was not taken until after lots of attorneys looked it over and talked about it. I have to believe they thought they were doing it properly.

   Is their congress still in session? Is taking a vote now still an option?

2. #102
   On March 18th, 2011 at 6:02 pm, swede said:

   Haven’t followed the whole thread, so ‘scuse me if this has been mentioned.

   From John McCormack at Weekly Standard:

   I don’t think this lawsuit has a chance of succeeding in the end. Here’s why: Senate Chief Clerk Rob Marchant, a non-partisan official who offers legal and parliamentary advice to the senate, wrote in an email to senators the night the bill passed that the vote was legitimate:

   There was some discussion today about the notice provided for the legislature’s conference committee. In special session, under Senate Rule 93, no advance notice is required other than posting on the legislative bulletin board. Despite this rule, it was decided to provide a 2 hour notice by posting on the bulletin board. My staff, as a courtesy, emailed a copy of the notice to all legisaltive offices at 4:10, which gave the impression that the notice may have been slightly less than 2 hours. Either way, the notice appears to have satisfied the requirements of the rules and statutes.

   I thought you might find this information to be useful.

   Thanks.

   Rob

3. #103
   On March 18th, 2011 at 6:10 pm, Ignatius Reilly said:

   On March 18th, 2011 at 5:51 pm, orlandocajun said…Am I the only one insulted by this bureaucratic tripe?

   No, you definitely are not. This politicized nonsense is utterly incoherent.

4. #104
   On March 18th, 2011 at 8:47 pm, bob121 said:

   We in WI all knew that the following would happen:
   -Dems would object to a Dane County judge. (being Dane County, it can only be a liberal)

   -The Dane County judge would rule against the law (partial at this point due to unnecessary TRO, but the end is predetermined)

   -This will go to the WI Supreme Court, where conservatives have a 4/7 edge.

   This is all a delaying action on the part of union toadies to give the locals time to screw over as many cities and counties as they can before the law goes live. Some headway has been made by the unions in this regard.

5. #105
   On March 18th, 2011 at 8:54 pm, OK_Loyalist said:

   On March 18th, 2011 at 8:47 pm, bob121 said:

   We in WI all knew that the following would happen:
   -Dems would object to a Dane County judge. (being Dane County, it can only be a liberal)

   -The Dane County judge would rule against the law (partial at this point due to unnecessary TRO, but the end is predetermined)

   -This will go to the WI Supreme Court, where conservatives have a 4/7 edge.

   This is all a delaying action on the part of union toadies to give the locals time to screw over as many cities and counties as they can before the law goes live. Some headway has been made by the unions in this regard.

   How’s the quote go… oh yeah… Get your boot on their throats! The conservatives much crush their windpipes so it can no longer suck another parasitical breath.

6. #106
   On March 18th, 2011 at 10:09 pm, OK_Loyalist said:

   How’s the quote go… oh yeah… Get your boot on their throats! The conservatives much must crush their windpipes so it can no longer suck another parasitical breath.

   It looked perfect in Preview

7. #107
   On March 18th, 2011 at 10:36 pm, Hangfire said:

   On March 18th, 2011 at 10:09 pm, OK_Loyalist said:
   It looked perfect in Preview

   If everything looked perfect in hindsight, you could be a Naval Officer.

8. #108
   On March 18th, 2011 at 11:09 pm, ChapBix said:

   In hindsight, you are looking at the rear of the horse (or whatever it is you are riding).

9. #109
   On March 18th, 2011 at 11:31 pm, ChapBix said:

   On March 18th, 2011 at 2:04 pm, rightisright said:

   looks like another liberal judge writing law.

   What do we need legislatures for if the leftist judges are going to strike down laws passed by the legislature and then write the laws they want? Oh, that’s right! We would just be another soviet style non-republic.

10. #110
    On March 18th, 2011 at 11:37 pm, TooMuchTime said:

    Do not forget that the fleebaggers had 3 weeks notice! They knew exactly what the Republicans could do, and would do, and just chose to ignore it; knowing very well they would do a little judge shopping and get a TRO so the unions could steal more money from the taxpayers before the law takes effect. Trust me — the fleebaggers had this all planned out.

11. #111
    On March 19th, 2011 at 12:51 am, Freddy said:

    On March 18th, 2011 at 5:41 pm, Flyoverman said:

    This judge’s decision will last about 48 hours.

    This judge has no intention of actually ruling on this case for at least 6 months. This judge is bought and paid for by the public sector labor unions of the great, and corrupt, state of Wisconsin!

12. #112
    On March 19th, 2011 at 1:24 am, sbw999 said:

    The Dem principles…

    If you will lose a vote…run to a different State, and hide.

    If you lost a decision in Court…ignore it and proceed anyway with implementing your unconstitutional legislation.

    If you lost the vote….just have an activist liberal judge prevent it from being implemented, and count on the other side not to ignore the Judge as you do.

    What moral, law abiding people these liberals are. Examples for us all.

13. #113
    On March 19th, 2011 at 7:25 am, pokenhorn said:

    Exactly the kind of judge that has raped our constitution by hustling victimhood. Recall this political hack. Now. How about this ? Disobey. Defy these communist jurists. Disobey.

14. #114
    On March 19th, 2011 at 10:25 am, ChapBix said:

    We are not them (leftist, socialists and communists).

15. #115
    On March 20th, 2011 at 11:06 am, reshas1 said:

    Vote in support of Gov. Walker..

    http://www.journaltimes.com/polls/html_e7df0506-44fc-11e0-b687-001cc4c002e0.html#pd_a_4647768%23pd_a_4647768_

16. #116
    On April 8th, 2011 at 7:41 am, pokenhorn said:

    Is it clear yet? The unions of today are not unions at all, but field units of the Global Left. ‘Union’ leadership positions at all levels are simply hiding places for anarchists and bolsheviks. Our nation’s bureaucracies are peppered with far-left true believers, and ‘unions’ are among the most contaminated. This presence of anti-AMerican ‘leaders’ is a clear and present danger to the republic and to freedom.