Wednesday, March 30, 2011

We Now Return You To Your Regularly Scheduled Blog

OK, so we went and elected a clown car full of Teabaggers to offices all over this country because we needed us some of that fiscal discipline and American Idol finals were starting so who had time to, like, listen to these guys or anything? And say what you will about a bunch of people so delusional and lacking in self awareness they have their own chapter in the DSM, they are out there as we speak disciplining the fiscal. Right into the ground. Unfortunately, when it comes to other issues, like say law and order...well...not so much.
In a stunning twist, Gov. Scott Walker's legislation limiting collective bargaining for public workers was published Friday despite a judge's hold on the measure, prompting a dispute over whether it takes effect Saturday.
"Judges? We don't need no steenking judges," Senate Majority Leader Scott Fitzgerald (R-etard) said. "Now shut up and give me all your e-mails.
After the restraining order was issued March 18, Secretary of State Doug La Follette sent a letter that same day to the reference bureau rescinding earlier instructions to publish the bill Friday. "I further instruct you to remove all reference to March 25, 2011, as the publication date and not to proceed with publication until I contact you with a new publication date," his letter said.
"Hey. It was in all the papers," Fitzgerald said. "Everybody knows about it so it's law. Don't you read your history? It's the same as when the Founding Fathers took the Declaration of Independence out of the Bible and published it in the Wall Street Journal. Just be thankful we didn't publish that shoot on sight law we passed when all those pansy democrats ran to Illinois.  I think the governor just stuck it up on the bulletin board down by the cafeteria so that really didn't count or anything, except if someone saw a democrat in the buffet line."
In a memo to Assembly Minority Leader Peter Barca, an attorney for the nonpartisan Legislative Council said that the legislation would not become law based on Friday's action. That's because although state law provides for a separate role for both the reference bureau and the secretary of state in publishing laws, the section in state law on when legislation takes effect refers only to action by the secretary of state, the memo said.
"Look, there's too dang many laws about laws around here," Fitzgerald told reporters. "The people elected us to do some serious fiscalizing and once we get rid of the unions and that's what we're gonna do. Then we're gonna take a close look at them child labor laws. Kids got too much time on their hands today and once we kick out all the brown pep...I mean illegal immigrants we'll need someone to do those jobs."
Howard Schweber, a professor of political science and legal studies at the University of Wisconsin-Madison, said Friday's actions amounted to "entirely uncharted waters."
He said that the action Friday didn't remove the possibility that the Supreme Court could take up the question of the restraining order against La Follette. He questioned how the justices would react to a publication step being taken before they had made any decision.
"You know, I'm beginning to wonder if we even need a Legislative Branch," Fitzgerald mused. "It don't say nothing about it in the Constitution."

2 comments:

Anonymous said...

"DSM"?
"Laboratory at Democracy"?
"Op- Ed article"?
Ah yes.
Better known as:
"Transparency".

Seeing Eye Chick said...

Great minds and all that. I just posted a fascinating Rachel Maddow who mentions many elements in this blog post. Check it out.