Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
|
#1
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
I did not support the guy just because his political affiliation began with
"R". Nor did many others. McClintock was the best Republican candidate. I would like to see how many Dems voted for the guy. A bunch. They all think Californina politics will become exciting as a Terminator movie. :-( Too bad you had to try to spin the win with your political bias. It is unbecoming of you Chuck. That is my honest opinion. They have elected a celebrity, not a proven administrator, into a situation where a proven administrator is required. Good luck, CA. Hopefully, the interests that bankrolled the $1mm required to unseat Davis know something about governing and they can instruct Arnold effectively. California spoke. Live with it. They did. Makes no diffy woo to me, except as further proof that California continues to be the Enchanted Land of Fruits and Nuts. http://www.eff.org/Privacy/Surveilla...0011031_eff_us a_patriot_analysis.php |
#2
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]() "Gould 0738" wrote in message ... I did not support the guy just because his political affiliation began with "R". Nor did many others. McClintock was the best Republican candidate. I agree. Too bad the voters did not see that. Hollywood blinded them. But let us not forget the fact that they wanted a change and were desperate considering the cast of players they were able to choose from. I would like to see how many Dems voted for the guy. A bunch. They all think Californina politics will become exciting as a Terminator movie. :-( Truly sad indeed. Arnold has a tough job ahead of him. He wants to cut $8 billion from the budget and reduce property taxes at the same time. Good luck in that endeavor. Too bad you had to try to spin the win with your political bias. It is unbecoming of you Chuck. That is my honest opinion. They have elected a celebrity, not a proven administrator, into a situation where a proven administrator is required. Good luck, CA. Hopefully, the interests that bankrolled the $1mm required to unseat Davis know something about governing and they can instruct Arnold effectively. Since he has been elected, I think everyone needs to give him a chance. He will likely fail, but who knows. I just hate to see the partisanship coming into play now, with the dems promising another recall election in 100 days. California spoke. Live with it. They did. Makes no diffy woo to me, except as further proof that California continues to be the Enchanted Land of Fruits and Nuts. Again we agree. The state is totally screwed up both fiscally and politically. They made their bed. Let them sleep in it. |
#3
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Thu, 09 Oct 2003 00:00:15 GMT, "Jim -" wrote:
[snip] I just hate to see the partisanship coming into play now, with the dems promising another recall election in 100 days. "Coming into play NOW?" Jeez--the whole THING was a display of partisanship--period. Joe Parsons |
#4
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]() "Joe Parsons" wrote in message ... On Thu, 09 Oct 2003 00:00:15 GMT, "Jim -" wrote: [snip] I just hate to see the partisanship coming into play now, with the dems promising another recall election in 100 days. "Coming into play NOW?" Jeez--the whole THING was a display of partisanship--period. Joe Parsons Exactly how Joe? |
#5
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Thu, 09 Oct 2003 00:28:55 GMT, "Jim -" wrote:
"Joe Parsons" wrote in message .. . On Thu, 09 Oct 2003 00:00:15 GMT, "Jim -" wrote: [snip] I just hate to see the partisanship coming into play now, with the dems promising another recall election in 100 days. "Coming into play NOW?" Jeez--the whole THING was a display of partisanship--period. Joe Parsons Exactly how Joe? Well, let's see...where to start? How about the fact that Rep. Darrell Issa (R Vista) was writing checks and gathering signatures for a recall even as Gray Davis was being sworn in for his second term as Governor. And (imagine everyone's surprise) Rep. Issa intended to run as a replacement candidate himself. Now, there's no argument that Davis was an unpopular governor--when the SF Chronicle endorsed him over his Republican Rival, Bill Simon, they said, "Hold your nose and vote for Davis." But I don't think it takes any exceptional discernment to see that the recall, initiated and funded by one politician who did not like the outcome of the just-completed, lawful election, was a back-door way to capture an office he would have no chance to win in a normal, 10 month long campaign. As it was, toward the end of this six-week campaign, Schwarzenegger's support was waning from its peak, and I don't think it takes too much of an imagination to guess that, given time and a "normal" campaign, his undeniable star power would not be sufficient to carry him into the Governor's office. I hope he does manage to keep his considerable energies to the daunting task ahead of him. I suspect he's in for some eye-openers when he has to lock horns with some of the farther right members of his party in the State Legislature. I wish him all the best. Joe Parsons |
#6
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]() "Joe Parsons" wrote in message ... On Thu, 09 Oct 2003 00:28:55 GMT, "Jim -" wrote: "Joe Parsons" wrote in message .. . On Thu, 09 Oct 2003 00:00:15 GMT, "Jim -" wrote: [snip] I just hate to see the partisanship coming into play now, with the dems promising another recall election in 100 days. "Coming into play NOW?" Jeez--the whole THING was a display of partisanship--period. Joe Parsons Exactly how Joe? Well, let's see...where to start? How about the fact that Rep. Darrell Issa (R Vista) was writing checks and gathering signatures for a recall even as Gray Davis was being sworn in for his second term as Governor. And (imagine everyone's surprise) Rep. Issa intended to run as a replacement candidate himself. Now, there's no argument that Davis was an unpopular governor--when the SF Chronicle endorsed him over his Republican Rival, Bill Simon, they said, "Hold your nose and vote for Davis." But I don't think it takes any exceptional discernment to see that the recall, initiated and funded by one politician who did not like the outcome of the just-completed, lawful election, was a back-door way to capture an office he would have no chance to win in a normal, 10 month long campaign. As it was, toward the end of this six-week campaign, Schwarzenegger's support was waning from its peak, and I don't think it takes too much of an imagination to guess that, given time and a "normal" campaign, his undeniable star power would not be sufficient to carry him into the Governor's office. I hope he does manage to keep his considerable energies to the daunting task ahead of him. I suspect he's in for some eye-openers when he has to lock horns with some of the farther right members of his party in the State Legislature. I wish him all the best. Joe Parsons It's been said that California gets a lot more liberal legislature than they vote for. As to a recall, I do not think the Democrat party is stupid enough to try it, but sometimes they surprise me. 43% of the people voted for Arnold. More votes than Grey got in the last election. People in this state are really ****ed at the legislators at this time. Spend way more than is coming in at the same time that revenues increased 24% and passing bills to allow illegal's to get driver's licenses, etc. In the first 4 years of Davis's leadership, he grew state government employment 44,000. Accepted donations from special interests and then did what they paid for. Both corporations and unions. Prison guards donate a mill and half and get a 30% raise on top of earlier raises while the state is laying off people and cutting child and health services. The Dem leadership of the state legislature has already stated that Arnold can suck eggs. May backfire bigtime when it is time to have the next election. |
#7
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Thu, 09 Oct 2003 04:42:35 GMT, "Calif Bill"
wrote: 43% of the people voted for Arnold. Didn't a higher percentage vote not to remove Davis? In the first 4 years of Davis's leadership, he grew state government employment 44,000. while the state is laying off people and cutting child and health services. Somehow, the above two statement appear to contradict each other. bb |
#8
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
"Calif Bill" wrote in message news:%G5hb.3827
It's been said that California gets a lot more liberal legislature than they vote for. As to a recall, I do not think the Democrat party is stupid enough to try it, but sometimes they surprise me. Yes, they COULD possibly be as stupid as the republicans, who did it. Why would the Dems be "stupid" for rallying for a recall? Was the Repubs equally stupid for rallying for one? As for the choices the people made, I'd really rather have somebody leading my state that knows something about the subject, rather than hire some actor just because he's affiliated with the party of my choice. |
#9
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Thu, 09 Oct 2003 00:00:15 GMT, "Jim -"
wrote: I just hate to see the partisanship coming into play now, with the dems promising another recall election in 100 days. Well at least the Democrat Feinstein has the nads to attempt to do what right for the public, rather than what's best for party politics: Feinstein, who waged a strong campaign to help her one-time foe Davis remain in office, said she was ready to help Republican governor-elect Schwarzenegger and called a rumored Democratic effort to subject him to a recall drive a "mistake." "One of the problems is hyper-partisanship," said Feinstein. "You need to break that cycle." bb |