snip

OK.......

So lets *say- Arnie don't slap any more asses, proves his business degree
is
more than paper, and actually gets California turned around while forming
a
bridge between the two parties.

IF (big if I grant) he does all that without digging any real
holes.........
how do we elect him President? Ammendment? Or can congress pass a law to
"give him a pass" somehow?

It would seem that the Republicans are breaking new ground by finding
convenient loopholes in the government rules.
Other than Arnold's election, the gerrymandering in Texas comes to mind.
If *they* wanted Arnold in - I don't think *they* would have much trouble
coming up with some way to get *their* boy in.

Mark Browne

Arnold might be a Republican, but outside of California he passes most of
the "smell test" for a Demacrat too. If he can do the job - I'll LIKE him -
even if he switches parties every 6 months.

-W

"Mark Browne" wrote in message
news:4P4hb.524266$Oz4.385975@rwcrnsc54...
snip

OK.......

So lets *say- Arnie don't slap any more asses, proves his business
degree
is
more than paper, and actually gets California turned around while
forming
a
bridge between the two parties.

IF (big if I grant) he does all that without digging any real
holes.........
how do we elect him President? Ammendment? Or can congress pass a law to
"give him a pass" somehow?

It would seem that the Republicans are breaking new ground by finding
convenient loopholes in the government rules.
Other than Arnold's election, the gerrymandering in Texas comes to mind.
If *they* wanted Arnold in - I don't think *they* would have much trouble
coming up with some way to get *their* boy in.

Mark Browne

"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 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

You disappoint me Chuck. Show the true Harry colors. Knock the person
because he is not your very Liberal type. He is a damn good administrator.
Look at his movie company. Look at his real estate empire. He stated at
one time that he would control all his films after he did his first 3 under
a contract with no say in the film. Why the toad "Commando" was filmed with
him. He says that movie was bad. Except for a couple of lines, he is
correct. He is the producer of the Terminator series. He has selected good
people to work for him. Runs a very successful real estate operation. I
understand he has more money from the real estate than the films. Santa
Monica has been mostly redeveloped by Arnold's company. He seems to be a
hell of a lot more successful in business than most of us on wreck.boats
Has more money than his in-laws and where is the administrative back ground
of Ted Kennedy. And you guys love him.
Bill

"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.

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

Arnold has to deal with the Lock-jawed, sell to the highest bidder (even if
not very high) Democrats that have taken over this state! Spend no matter
what the result, if it gives more power to the Dem's in control.
Bill

"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...

"basskisser" wrote in message
m...
You have a new governor. No matter that he has little education, knows
nothing about politics, has never studied political science, or law,
he's a Republican, and that's all that counts, right?!!


Arnold is NOT the kind of lockjawed Republican the neo-con-victs wanted.
Obviously, he's quite liberal socially, and his positions indicate he's a
fiscal moderate. In other words, he's a throwback to the moderate to
liberal
Republicans of the 1960s and 1970s, before that party went nutso.

Remember, it was Richard Nixon who gave us wage-price controls and who
opened the door to the PRC. And while he was a "conservative" for those
days, by his party's standards today, he'd be considered a dirty commie
pinko.

I would have preferred that the Democrats kept the California statehouse,
but I don't have any serious issues with Arnold as a politician. Not yet.
I
respect him as a self-made man of accomplishment and in his serious
moments,
he seems bright enough. He's certainly more capable and smarter than, say,
George W. Bush.

The people of California made a choice, and now it is up to Arnold to work
with the Democrats and do what he can to help resolve that state's issues.
I
hope he is successful.

"bb" wrote in message
...
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

46% voted no recall, was wrong on the 43%, was 48% for Arnold.

Grew state employment 44,000 and then when the fan turns on, he raises
guards pay at same time cutting payments to Regional Centers, etc. Regional
Centers handle the people who used to be in mental hospitals and also
handicapped children, etc.

You disappoint me Chuck. Show the true Harry colors. Knock the person
because he is not your very Liberal type. He is a damn good administrator.
Look at his movie company.

How tough is it to run a successful movie company that makes films featuring
Arnold S.?

I submit that a "good administrator" wouldn't be caught flat footed outside the
filing office and have to admit to the press that he didn't even have a plan to
run the state at the time he filed for office. A good administrator doesn't buy
a business he has no idea how to run.


Look at his real estate empire.

So, suddenly every real estate investor is qualified to be a state governor?
Most real estate wealth is created from passive income and capital
appreciation. Buy right, get slightly lucky, and you make money inspite of
yourself.

Has more money than his in-laws and where is the administrative back ground
of Ted Kennedy. And you guys love him.
Bill

Who is "you guys"?
Doesn't include me. Ted K is a walking, talking, exhibit in favor of term
limits.
2-3 terms ought to be enough for a senator, especially when the terms are six
years apiece. These guys who serve decade, after decade, after decade become an
instution- rather than a representative of the people. Don't forget that I'm
well to the left of most Democrats. I want to see the people represented
effectively (to actualize the concept of self government) and the Constitution
upheld. To hell with political parties, any of them, that do not serve those
two primary objectives. The welfare of the parties is supposed to be
subordinate to the welfare of the people and the nation state. No particular
fan of Kennedy here.....and certainly not among any group that "loves" him. Ted
K is a mainstream, party Democrat- a status that means nothing to me, and maybe
a lot of other independent liberals.

"WaIIy" wrote in message
news
It must be very upsetting to you to see your leftist/socialist power
mongers on the ropes.

The more you guys whine, ****, moan and cheat, the worse you do.

I love it.

Have another beer and enjoy it while you can Wilbur. I expect you'll live
plenty long enough to see the dems back in power and maybe even long enough
to once again witness a balanced budget.

Joe Parsons wrote in message
Vell, let me tell you sumthing: Aaah-nult may be de Teuhminatah, but de problem
is that ve dun't know about his qualifications. That does not mean Aaaah-nult
is not qualified to be de Governor of Caleeforneea. It chust means ve don't
know foh schuah.

I think ve schould vait und zee.

Bezides: zome of us kint of LIKE talking like Aaaah-nult--even if ve ditn't vote
foah him ant thought it vas a BAD ideah.

Choe Paaahsons

Heehee! That must have took a lot of time!! Very funny, though.