jeb in 7th place in Iowa poll

[okie52]

New Poll: Walker Leads GOP Field, Jeb a Distant 7th

Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker has a commanding lead in a poll of Iowa Republican caucus-goers while former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush comes in at a distant seventh among a large field of potential contenders. Rubio has the highest favorability ratings of the Republican pack, with 69 percent saying they see him favorably and like his positions.

Read Latest Breaking News from Newsmax.com http://www.newsmax.com/#ixzz3ZO4GsYIp


Always good to see jeb near the bottom even if its in Iowa where he was expected to struggle. Disappointing to see Rubio tied for 2nd. But, then again, great to see lindsey graham nowhere on the radar.

[champions77]

Always good to see jeb near the bottom even if its in Iowa where he was expected to struggle. Disappointing to see Rubio tied for 2nd. But, then again, great to see lindsey graham nowhere on the radar.

Amen brother. The faster we weed out these democrat wannabees Rhinos the better off the party is. Unfortunately the big money GOP donors have pledged millions to JEB.

[SicEmBaylor]

I will never support that son of a bitch.
Period.

[okie52]

Amen brother. The faster we weed out these democrat wannabees Rhinos the better off the party is. Unfortunately the big money GOP donors have pledged millions to JEB.

Yep...although jeb is still "exploring" his candidacy...well for some months now anyway. He'll need a lot of money to push him out front with his name and positions. But Wallstreet and the pub establishment love him so I feel certain he'll end up in the final 2-3 pubs left in the field...disgusting as that is to think about.

[okie52]

I will never support that son of a bitch.
Period.

It looks like in the poll that 25% of the pubs wouldn't support him either no matter what....glad to hear that although I wish it was higher.

[rock on sooner]

As a point of interest..in the 2012 race, each declared Pub took his turn
as a poll leader, even Trump! Not sure I understand the love for Walker,
though. In WI his unfavorable is higher than his favorable, so much discontent
that his vocal opponents are running "Beware of Walker" ads in IA newspapers.
Shouldn't be too long before they're all in and will start dropping out when the
realization of not enough money sets in. Bush will soak up a lot of it and $$$
talks in national elections, so sez Cap'n Obvious.

[dwarthog]

As a point of interest..in the 2012 race, each declared Pub took his turn
as a poll leader, even Trump! Not sure I understand the love for Walker,
though. In WI his unfavorable is higher than his favorable, so much discontent
that his vocal opponents are running "Beware of Walker" ads in IA newspapers.
Shouldn't be too long before they're all in and will start dropping out when the
realization of not enough money sets in. Bush will soak up a lot of it and $$$
talks in national elections, so sez Cap'n Obvious.

I'm not sure I would use those vocal Wisconsin voters as an indicator. They are none to happy that they have been unable to vote him out or to get him out via the recall.

Their hate for Scott Walker borders on being a mental illness IMO.

[olevetonahill]

Well Old T bone Pickens says Billary will drop out and he's supporting Jeb

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/boone-pickens--hillary-clinton-will-drop-out-of-2016-race-154056399.html;_ylt=A0LEV0E6k0pVGjEAuGtXNyoA;_ylu= X3oDMTEzMHI1cGRnBGNvbG8DYmYxBHBvcwMxBHZ0aWQDVklQNT k0XzEEc2VjA3Ny

[SicEmBaylor]

Well Old T bone Pickens says Billary will drop out and he's supporting Jeb

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/boone-pickens--hillary-clinton-will-drop-out-of-2016-race-154056399.html;_ylt=A0LEV0E6k0pVGjEAuGtXNyoA;_ylu= X3oDMTEzMHI1cGRnBGNvbG8DYmYxBHBvcwMxBHZ0aWQDVklQNT k0XzEEc2VjA3Ny

Pickens is a lunatic.

[RUSH LIMBAUGH is my clone!]

I'm not sure I would use those vocal Wisconsin voters as an indicator. They are none to happy that they have been unable to vote him out or to get him out via the recall.

Their hate for Scott Walker borders on being a mental illness IMO.The Left in WI of course hates Scott, but that's to be expected. Even Beary is prolly too conservative for them, as well.

[olevetonahill]

Pickens is a lunatic.

While I detest him i dont think hes very crazy except on this and OsEwe

[SicEmBaylor]

The Left in WI of course hates Scott, but that's to be expected. Even Beary is prolly too conservative for them, as well.

I highly doubt he's too conservative for them. The WI democratic-left is something of a different constituency within the Democratic Party than what Obama represents. The anti-Walker left is made up of Wisconsin's academic-left (which very well might consider Obama too conservative), but the majority of the anti-Walker crowd are white blue collar Union workers both public and private. Politically, they're dedicated Democrats; however, I wouldn't go so far as to say that they're so liberal they'd think Obama is a conservative. That's just not accurate.

[champions77]

Pickens is a lunatic.

At least that's what his kids said when TBoone started giving away hundreds of millions to Aggie State.

[SicEmBaylor]

While I detest him i dont think hes very crazy except on this and OsEwe

There are more reasons than that for thinking he's a loon. Endorsing Giuliani is another perfect example.

[RUSH LIMBAUGH is my clone!]

I highly doubt he's too conservative for them. The WI democratic-left is something of a different constituency within the Democratic Party than what Obama represents. The anti-Walker left is made up of Wisconsin's academic-left (which very well might consider Obama too conservative), but the majority of the anti-Walker crowd are white blue collar Union workers both public and private. Politically, they're dedicated Democrats; however, I wouldn't go so far as to say that they're so liberal they'd think Obama is a conservative. That's just not accurate.haha.

[RUSH LIMBAUGH is my clone!]

So, I haven't heard nor read that Scott Walker has officially declared himself a candidate.

[SicEmBaylor]

So, I haven't heard nor read that Scott Walker has officially declared himself a candidate.

He hasn't.

[SicEmBaylor]

haha.

Okay?

[RUSH LIMBAUGH is my clone!]

Okay?Certainly!

[SicEmBaylor]

Certainly!

I just didn't get the "haha" response, but I suppose it's par for the course. I really should just give up and bow to your vastly superior knowledge on the subject.

[RUSH LIMBAUGH is my clone!]

Are there some WI democrats who think even the socialist Obama is too conservative for them? I'm saying I believe that some of them are that way.

[rock on sooner]

You folks may not be aware but the WI constitution protects, big time,
the sitting incumbent in a recall. If memory serves, the incumbent has
essentially a blank check to defend him/herself in a recall while the challenger
is restricted to a very small amount of $$ to campaign with. It is something
like (not sure here) 5-7 to 1. I'm pretty sure that Walker outspent his opponent
about 7 to 1...he had outside money, hand over fist, while Kohl? (his opponent)
had many clamps on his campaign. Admittedly, I'm left of center and anti-union
at the same time but in support of WI unions, the fight wasn't fair and they still
almost got him. To take away collective bargaining rights to bust the union and
keep it busted sucks. Here in IA, a giant out of state company building a fertilizer
plant just fired 2500 union workers and is actively recruiting non union workers
from TX to replace them (this Co got over $100m in tax incentives from the Pub
governor to build here). I mention this only because it APPEARS the playing field
in not level, both in WI and this IA example.

Obama too conservative...nah...but then there are wingnuts in both parties, some
Indies, too.

[olevetonahill]

You folks may not be aware but the WI constitution protects, big time,
the sitting incumbent in a recall. If memory serves, the incumbent has
essentially a blank check to defend him/herself in a recall while the challenger
is restricted to a very small amount of $$ to campaign with. It is something
like (not sure here) 5-7 to 1. I'm pretty sure that Walker outspent his opponent
about 7 to 1...he had outside money, hand over fist, while Kohl? (his opponent)
had many clamps on his campaign. Admittedly, I'm left of center and anti-union
at the same time but in support of WI unions, the fight wasn't fair and they still
almost got him. To take away collective bargaining rights to bust the union and
keep it busted sucks. Here in IA, a giant out of state company building a fertilizer
plant just fired 2500 union workers and is actively recruiting non union workers
from TX to replace them (this Co got over $100m in tax incentives from the Pub
governor to build here). I mention this only because it APPEARS the playing field
in not level, both in WI and this IA example.

Obama too conservative...nah...but then there are wingnuts in both parties, some
Indies, too.

Couple questions on yer statement Bro.
What makes ya think any one HERE gives a **** what a bunch of Lib yankees do in Wi.?

Nother is ya got a link to thaat story of an Out of state company firing 2500 workers?
Ive been to a Lot of Plants under construction and never knew on to have to have so many construction workers

[SicEmBaylor]

You folks may not be aware but the WI constitution protects, big time,
the sitting incumbent in a recall. If memory serves, the incumbent has
essentially a blank check to defend him/herself in a recall while the challenger
is restricted to a very small amount of $$ to campaign with. It is something
like (not sure here) 5-7 to 1. I'm pretty sure that Walker outspent his opponent
about 7 to 1...he had outside money, hand over fist, while Kohl? (his opponent)
had many clamps on his campaign. Admittedly, I'm left of center and anti-union
at the same time but in support of WI unions, the fight wasn't fair and they still
almost got him. To take away collective bargaining rights to bust the union and
keep it busted sucks. Here in IA, a giant out of state company building a fertilizer
plant just fired 2500 union workers and is actively recruiting non union workers
from TX to replace them (this Co got over $100m in tax incentives from the Pub
governor to build here). I mention this only because it APPEARS the playing field
in not level, both in WI and this IA example.

Obama too conservative...nah...but then there are wingnuts in both parties, some
Indies, too.

The GOP (including Walker, PACs, out of state donations, etc.) spent $58m while Democrats (including all candidates, PACs, out of state donations, etc.) spent $22m. Outside special interest groups spent $40m on Walker and $36m on Democrats.

Now, there's a cap of $10,000 on donations over the term of office for Wisconsin elected officials, but there is a four month period between the recall papers being filed and the election itself in which the normal limit-cap does not apply. This allowed Walker to raise money over that cap; HOWEVER, and this is a big 'HOWEVER', it also allows recall committees to raise beyond the cap as well. Meaning those committees formed for the purpose of recalling Walker were able to break the same cap. In fact, Wisconsin Democrats have in the past benefited from this rule to win their own recall elections.

And the Koch Bros? For Christ's sake.

[dwarthog]

You folks may not be aware but the WI constitution protects, big time,
the sitting incumbent in a recall. If memory serves, the incumbent has
essentially a blank check to defend him/herself in a recall while the challenger
is restricted to a very small amount of $$ to campaign with. It is something
like (not sure here) 5-7 to 1. I'm pretty sure that Walker outspent his opponent
about 7 to 1...he had outside money, hand over fist, while Kohl? (his opponent)
had many clamps on his campaign. Admittedly, I'm left of center and anti-union
at the same time but in support of WI unions, the fight wasn't fair and they still
almost got him. To take away collective bargaining rights to bust the union and
keep it busted sucks. Here in IA, a giant out of state company building a fertilizer
plant just fired 2500 union workers and is actively recruiting non union workers
from TX to replace them (this Co got over $100m in tax incentives from the Pub
governor to build here). I mention this only because it APPEARS the playing field
in not level, both in WI and this IA example.

Obama too conservative...nah...but then there are wingnuts in both parties, some
Indies, too.

Rock,

I did some poking around and found this.


Over the course of the campaign, those supporting the recalls, including organized labor, spent an estimated $20 million to recall the GOP senators. On the other side, nearly as much was spent by and on behalf of the incumbents.

Source
http://www.wpri.org/WPRI/Reports/2012/The-History-of-the-Recall-in-Wisconsin.htm

The above was in regards to the recalls on the GOP senators.

I haven't found any info on the $$ spent by both sides re the Walker recall yet.

It would seem from the above there isn't much in the way of restrictions on spending for the folks trying to unseat an incumbent in a recall, in fact it would appear they outspent the incumbents in those recall attempts.

[okie52]

You folks may not be aware but the WI constitution protects, big time,
the sitting incumbent in a recall. If memory serves, the incumbent has
essentially a blank check to defend him/herself in a recall while the challenger
is restricted to a very small amount of $$ to campaign with. It is something
like (not sure here) 5-7 to 1. I'm pretty sure that Walker outspent his opponent
about 7 to 1...he had outside money, hand over fist, while Kohl? (his opponent)
had many clamps on his campaign. Admittedly, I'm left of center and anti-union
at the same time but in support of WI unions, the fight wasn't fair and they still
almost got him. To take away collective bargaining rights to bust the union and
keep it busted sucks. Here in IA, a giant out of state company building a fertilizer
plant just fired 2500 union workers and is actively recruiting non union workers
from TX to replace them (this Co got over $100m in tax incentives from the Pub
governor to build here). I mention this only because it APPEARS the playing field
in not level, both in WI and this IA example.

Obama too conservative...nah...but then there are wingnuts in both parties, some
Indies, too.

Hey rock...I support the workers right to collective bargaining in the private sector but I sure don't support a government employee's right to collective bargaining.

I also support a company's right to replace union workers...that's the balance to collective bargaining.

[rock on sooner]

Couple questions on yer statement Bro.
What makes ya think any one HERE gives a **** what a bunch of Lib yankees do in Wi.?

Nother is ya got a link to thaat story of an Out of state company firing 2500 workers?
Ive been to a Lot of Plants under construction and never knew on to have to have so many construction workers

Heh, Vet, I knew that you dint GAS about WI workers..lol..

The company is Orascom..it's the largest public company in Eygt.
The plant is a $1.4B job....Google "Orascom lays off IA workers"
you'll get several different stories to read. The report is they laid
off 2500 unionized workers with no notice and are aggressively
recruiting non union workers in TX. This company got $100m tax
incentive to build here in IA from our Pub governor...

[SicEmBaylor]

Public employees should never be allowed to unionize. They should never be allowed to collective bargain. They should never be allowed to 'strike' and the penalty for doing so should be dismissal from their job.

[Turd_Ferguson]

Heh, Vet, I knew that you dint GAS about WI workers..lol..

The company is Orascom..it's the largest public company in Eygt.
The plant is a $1.4B job....Google "Orascom lays off IA workers"
you'll get several different stories to read. The report is they laid
off 2500 unionized workers with no notice and are aggressively
recruiting non union workers in TX. This company got $100m tax
incentive to build here in IA from our Pub governor...

Good. Unions are soon to be a thing of the past. They're fighting tooth and nail to keep their scam going.

[SicEmBaylor]

Good. Unions are soon to be a thing of the past. They're fighting tooth and nail to keep their scam going.

There were never good public employee unions. They've all been a travesty that should never have happened in the first place. Now, private sector unions are another matter. I hate the damned things and always have, but I'm not oblivious to the fact that they did some good. Furthermore, everyone in the private sector ought to have the right to unionize. Now, whether a business or industry chooses to accept and work with a union is another matter entirely. Personally, if I owned a business and my employees unionized then I'd fire every single one of them assuming they were relatively easy to replace with non-union workers. Sometimes you're in a situation where skilled employees are not easily replaced by non-union workers -- in those cases, I truly feel sorry for company executives.

[FaninAma]

The GOP (including Walker, PACs, out of state donations, etc.) spent $58m while Democrats (including all candidates, PACs, out of state donations, etc.) spent $22m. Outside special interest groups spent $40m on Walker and $36m on Democrats.

Now, there's a cap of $10,000 on donations over the term of office for Wisconsin elected officials, but there is a four month period between the recall papers being filed and the election itself in which the normal limit-cap does not apply. This allowed Walker to raise money over that cap; HOWEVER, and this is a big 'HOWEVER', it also allows recall committees to raise beyond the cap as well. Meaning those committees formed for the purpose of recalling Walker were able to break the same cap. In fact, Wisconsin Democrats have in the past benefited from this rule to win their own recall elections.

And the Koch Bros? For Christ's sake.
Plus I am pretty sure all of the "VOLUNTEER" time spent by public employee union members to recall Walker didn't show up in the limits on campaign spending, either.

[RUSH LIMBAUGH is my clone!]

Good posts, Sicem. Businesses should have the right to hire non-union labor. Laws prohibiting them from doing that shouldn't be considered legal.

[SicEmBaylor]

Plus I am pretty sure all of the "VOLUNTEER" time spent by public employee union members to recall Walker didn't show up in the limits on campaign spending, either.

Very good point.

[hawaii 5-0]

The Dems in Wisky now have company.

http://wcmcoop.com/2015/03/29/wisconsin-republicans-abandoning-scott-walker/

5-0

[FaninAma]

The Dems in Wisky now have company.

http://wcmcoop.com/2015/03/29/wisconsin-republicans-abandoning-scott-walker/

5-0

I guess you didn't see this little correction at the bottom of the article:

CORRECTION: Pete Kennedy is not a Republican.

But carry on, I never like to interrupt somebody on the left when they are making a fool of themselves.

[RUSH LIMBAUGH is my clone!]

The Dems in Wisky now have company.

http://wcmcoop.com/2015/03/29/wisconsin-republicans-abandoning-scott-walker/

5-0Hilarious!...and, pathetic. Why do you bother to read such smut?

[hawaii 5-0]

Hilarious!...and, pathetic. Why do you bother to read such smut?

If there's a lie in the article please feel free to mention it. Meanwhile the slow but sure vetting of the College Dropout continues.... by both Parties.

5-0

[RUSH LIMBAUGH is my clone!]

If there's a lie in the article please feel free to mention it. Meanwhile the slow but sure vetting of the College Dropout continues.... by both Parties.

5-0We have little doubt the Left is trying hard to discredit him. Means he's gotta be doing some worthwhile things.

[TAFBSooner]

Public employees should never be allowed to unionize. They should never be allowed to collective bargain. They should never be allowed to 'strike' and the penalty for doing so should be dismissal from their job.

Why not?

[okie52]

Why not?

Because they are government jobs that are paid for by taxpayers. They have representation through their congressmen and state legislators/local officials to get pay hikes and/or working conditions to be changed. On the state and lower levels the competition between other states/municipalities will also provide incentives for wage increases/better benefits. They certainly shouldn't be allowed to "strike" (although many aren't allowed to strike by law) and hold the government and/or taxpayers hostage for their demands.

[Turd_Ferguson]

Because they are government jobs that are paid for by taxpayers. They have representation through their congressmen and state legislators/local officials to get pay hikes and/or working conditions to be changed. On the state and lower levels the competition between other states/municipalities will also provide incentives for wage increases/better benefits. They certainly shouldn't be allowed to "strike" (although many aren't allowed to strike by law) and hold the government and/or taxpayers hostage for their demands.

Word.

[SicEmBaylor]

Because they are government jobs that are paid for by taxpayers. They have representation through their congressmen and state legislators/local officials to get pay hikes and/or working conditions to be changed. On the state and lower levels the competition between other states/municipalities will also provide incentives for wage increases/better benefits. They certainly shouldn't be allowed to "strike" (although many aren't allowed to strike by law) and hold the government and/or taxpayers hostage for their demands.

Exactly right. One of the best posts I've seen from you.

[okie52]

Exactly right. One of the best posts I've seen from you.

Well, as long as I'm the limiting factor...thanks.

[okie52]

Ole jeb is firing on all cylinders...instate tuition and driver licenses for illegals, and now he'd keep Obama's executive amnesty for 4-5,000,000 illegals.


Jeb Bush: I Wouldn't Immediately Repeal Obama's Immigration Action
Monday, 11 May 2015 10:22 PM
By Greg Richter

Jeb Bush told Fox News Channel's Megyn Kelly that he would not attempt to immediately reverse President Barack Obama's executive action on immigration should he succeed him in the Oval Office.

The former Florida governor said he would instead wait for Congress to pass a law to make changes in immigration policy.

That sets Bush apart from many of his Republican counterparts who have said they would take immediate action. Obama in November issued an executive action to prevent millions of illegal immigrants from being deported.

Bush suggested that GOP voters "can be persuaded" to his way of thinking on the issue.

The action is currently being held up by a Texas federal judge as he considers a multistate lawsuit against Obama. Bush said he thinks the states will prevail in the lawsuit.

Asked about the political minefield of using an executive action to reverse the policy, Bush replied, "Pass meaningful reform of immigration and make it part of it."

He also defended his belief that illegal immigrants should be given driver's licenses and their children given in-state tuition.

"If you've been here for an extended period of time, you have no nexus to the country of your parents," he said, adding, "What are we supposed to do? Marginalize these people forever?"

While he supported legal status, he said that doesn't mean citizenship.

"I think illegal immigration ought to be punished by coming out from the shadows, earning legal status over an extended period of time where you pay a fine, where you work, where you don't receive government assistance, where you learn English … where you're deported if you commit a crime, as is the law."

Self-deportation isn't practical, he said, nor is "rounding people up door-to-door."

Bush acknowledged that many in the party disagree with his immigration views, but he argued, "If I go beyond the consideration of running to be an actual candidate, do you want people to just bend with the wind, to mirror people's sentiment? … Oh, yes, I used to be for that, but now I'm for this. Is that the way we elect a president?"

Read Latest Breaking News from Newsmax.com http://www.newsmax.com/Newsfront/Jeb-Bush-repeal-Obama-immigration/2015/05/11/id/643972/#ixzz3aVn3h1XI

[TAFBSooner]

Because they are government jobs that are paid for by taxpayers. They have representation through their congressmen and state legislators/local officials to get pay hikes and/or working conditions to be changed. On the state and lower levels the competition between other states/municipalities will also provide incentives for wage increases/better benefits. They certainly shouldn't be allowed to "strike" (although many aren't allowed to strike by law) and hold the government and/or taxpayers hostage for their demands.

Government jobs are paid for by taxpayers. Private sector jobs are paid for by customers. Why does that make a difference in whether or not the employees have the right to unionize?

Public employees trying to get representation through the electoral process would be like relying on customers of private companies to champion higher pay/better working conditions for private sector workers. It can't work.

Federal civil service unions don't bargain over pay. I believe the same is true of state employee unions, at least in Oklahoma. They do bargain over working conditions, and handle worker grievances.

I agree with you about public employee union members not being allowed to strike. I should have been more specific about my original "Why not?" To wit: There is a difference between the sources of private and public workers' pay - why does that mean the latter shouldn't be allowed to unionize?

[okie52]

Government jobs are paid for by taxpayers. Private sector jobs are paid for by customers. Why does that make a difference in whether or not the employees have the right to unionize?

Public employees trying to get representation through the electoral process would be like relying on customers of private companies to champion higher pay/better working conditions for private sector workers. It can't work.

Federal civil service unions don't bargain over pay. I believe the same is true of state employee unions, at least in Oklahoma. They do bargain over working conditions, and handle worker grievances.

I agree with you about public employee union members not being allowed to strike. I should have been more specific about my original "Why not?" To wit: There is a difference between the sources of private and public workers' pay - why does that mean the latter shouldn't be allowed to unionize?

State legislators, city councils, county officials, et al are already in the mix as to wages, working conditions, benefits, etc... They approve the budgets for the various state, civic and county agencies. They are also aware of competition from other states and cities so they have to keep wages and benefits competitive as well as competition from the private sector for government employees whose skills would be valued in their given industries. And they are powerful political blocs...just ask Wes Lane when the OKC police union favored his successor David Prater or when the teachers wanted to get rid of the state school superintendent Barressi.


Teachers End Chicago Strike on Second Try
By MONICA DAVEY and STEVEN YACCINOSEPT. 18, 2012
Photo

CHICAGO — The Chicago Teachers Union agreed on Tuesday to end its strike in the nation’s third-largest school system, allowing 350,000 children to return to classes on Wednesday and bringing to a close, at least for now, a tense standoff over issues like teacher evaluations and job security that had upended this city for more than a week.

In a private meeting on Tuesday afternoon, 800 union delegates voted overwhelmingly to suspend the strike after classes had been halted for seven school days, which left parents at loose ends and City Hall taking legal action. The delegates, who had chosen on Sunday to extend their strike rather than accept a deal reached by negotiators for the union and the Chicago Public Schools, this time decided to abandon their picket lines.

If its not strikes its sick ins, slow work or something else that would be disruptive.

I look at government jobs, ie tax payer money, as something that shouldn't be subject to collective bargaining...even if the bargaining isn't for specifically for "wages". As I said before they have representation and I don't think that tax payers should be held hostage by unions.


Oklahoma workers rally against proposed pension changes
Several hundred teachers, firefighters and state employees on Monday packed the Oklahoma Capitol’s fourth-floor rotunda to rally against proposed changes in the state pension system.

http://newsok.com/oklahoma-workers-rally-against-proposed-pension-changes/article/3934684


Why Are Thousands of Oklahoma Teachers Protesting Today at the Capitol?
By Wesley Fryer On March 31, 2014

Today will be a historic event in Oklahoma education history: Thousands of Oklahoma teachers, parents, and others are gathering for a rally on the steps of our state capitol in Oklahoma City. According to today’s Tulsa World article, “Education funding rally: Thousands of Oklahomans expected to descend on Capitol, press for more school dollars,”

http://www.speedofcreativity.org/2014/03/31/why-are-thousands-of-oklahoma-teachers-protesting-today-at-the-capitol/

[okie52]

Planned education rally angers lawmakers
Two state lawmakers are chastising Oklahoma school districts that are planning to give teachers and students a day off so they can lobby for more education funding at the state Capitol.
by Randy Ellis Published: February 7, 2014

Two state lawmakers are chastising Oklahoma school districts that have chosen to give teachers and students a day off so they can lobby for more education funding at the state Capitol.

“It's indefensible for government entities to use government resources to lobby government for more taxpayer money for more government,” Rep. Jason Murphey, R-Guthrie, said in a news release. “It's also extremely inappropriate for government entities to pressure their employees to take time away from their important duties to lobby for money for that entity.”.