The W
Views: 98350794
Main | FAQ | Search: Y! / G | Calendar | Color chart | Log in for more!
22.8.14 0652
The W - Current Events & Politics - Presenting California's next governor... (Page 2)
This thread has 61 referrals leading to it
Register and log in to post!
Pages: Prev 1 2 3 4 5 Next(1890 newer) Next thread | Previous thread
User
Post (96 total)
CRZ
Big Brother
Administrator








Since: 9.12.01
From: ミネアポリス

Since last post: 2 days
Last activity: 10 hours
AIM:  
ICQ:  
Y!:
#21 Posted on | Instant Rating: 8.65
Oh, come on.



©CRZ™
Grimis
Scrapple








Since: 11.7.02
From: MD

Since last post: 1207 days
Last activity: 1004 days
#22 Posted on | Instant Rating: 7.29
    Originally posted by socalgail
    Did you know that the top 400 personal income tax returns in the US last year had an average annual income of $175 mil.

Oh my god. Rich people HAVE A LOT OF MONEY!!!!!!!

{ EDIT: Restraint, please - CRZ }

(edited by CRZ on 4.8.03 0500)


"Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch. Liberty is a well-armed lamb contesting the vote."
- Ben Franklin, 1759
socalgail
Weisswurst








Since: 4.8.03
From: San Diego

Since last post: 3997 days
Last activity: 3842 days
#23 Posted on
Yes, you get it! And the corollary is that money equals power. Therefore, more money equals more power. That is why the rules favor the super rich and not the average person even though this is a representative democracy. Humans pay more attention to sexual matters than financial matters. Sexual matters are much more easily understood. Financial matters are complex and arcane. Humans are easily duped. Public officials can be bought. QED



socalgail
ges7184
Lap cheong








Since: 7.1.02
From: Birmingham, AL

Since last post: 109 days
Last activity: 32 days
#24 Posted on
Stupid humans!

Anyway, here's a update on the situation
http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2003/08/04/RECALL.TMP

Of note, Davis is trying to get the Supreme Court to delay the recall vote to March, arguing that they don't have enough money and time to set fair elections by October. They are also going to try to get Gray Davis on the replacement candidate ballot (possibly setting up a 'Gray Davis is unfit to be governor, and shall be replaced by Gray Davis' vote).

Also, the NAACP, among others, are going to state that the election is illegal since the number of polling places will be drastically reduced (wouldn't the solution to this be easy, more polling places. Why would there automatically be less polling places than any other election? Are setting these things up that hard?)

I've also heard elsewhere that another group is going to argue that should Davis election be recalled, that the Lieutenant Governor should take over, based upon the fact that the state Constitution says that should the Governor be unable to complete his/her term for ANY reason, the Lieutenant Governor shall assume the role of Govenor.

Interesting stuff.



Everything that is wrong in this world can be blamed on Freddie Prinze Jr.
Grimis
Scrapple








Since: 11.7.02
From: MD

Since last post: 1207 days
Last activity: 1004 days
#25 Posted on | Instant Rating: 7.29

    Originally posted by ges7184
    I've also heard elsewhere that another group is going to argue that should Davis election be recalled, that the Lieutenant Governor should take over, based upon the fact that the state Constitution says that should the Governor be unable to complete his/her term for ANY reason, the Lieutenant Governor shall assume the role of Govenor.

That makes way too much sense for the politics of California. One could assume that the reason this was done was so the Progressives of the era could replace the top of the bureaucratic monster with somebody not tied into the current administration.

Of course, if the removal provision were not there we would not be going through this entertaining exericse right now in the first place because Issa would've been a damned fool for bankrolling Bustamante into the governor's seat.



"Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch. Liberty is a well-armed lamb contesting the vote."
- Ben Franklin, 1759
socalgail
Weisswurst








Since: 4.8.03
From: San Diego

Since last post: 3997 days
Last activity: 3842 days
#26 Posted on

    Originally posted by ges7184
    Are setting these things up that hard?




No, just expensive. What I am wondering is if there is some way to get the people who signed the recall petitions to pay for this.

Instead of spending $30M-$60M on this venting exercise, why not spend it on research to get rid of the super Argentine ant colony that has taken over the state, causing us to dump millions of gallons of pesticide around the foundations of our houses? In the end, the ants will probably win.



socalgail
Pool-Boy
Lap cheong








Since: 1.8.02
From: Huntington Beach, CA

Since last post: 1253 days
Last activity: 19 days
AIM:  
ICQ:  
Y!:
#27 Posted on
I am sorry, $30 million is just not that much money, in the big picture. It is a small fraction (less than 1%) of the actual defecit. In comparison, it is far less than what we are paying to provide services to illegal aliens. How about those energy contracts he signed, condemning the state to pay 10x what the rest of this country is for electricity? How can anyone balk at $30 million being too much money when confronted with fiscal mismanagement like that? Hell, Davis is spending MORE than $30 million just to fight it. And, of course, the fact that he sells his signature to raise that kind of campaign money doesn't seem to bother any of his supporters.

This state is just leaking money right now, and if $30 million will help plug the hole, I say I am all for it. I find it funny that the governor who is willing to spend the money to have a helicopter fly all the way down the state to pick him up so he could miss 2 hours of traffic is complaining about the cost of something to be quite funny.

As far as the $60 million number goes... I have not heard any legitimate place that number came from. It was, however, the number that pollsters determined would be the figure that would most upset voters, and it has made its way into the pro-Davis talking points ever since. The Sec of State himself admits that the cost is going to be less than $30 million.

No matter what- the money has been spent, there is no turning back now. Once the election was certified the $30 million is gone. Since we HAVE spent the money, we might as well make proper use of it. Are you really going to vote to keep a completely corrupt, totally inept governor in office just because you thought it cost too much to put the question on the ballot?

(edited by Pool-Boy on 4.8.03 1152)




Still on the Shelf #17 - Pete, the P.O.'d Postal Worker
Leroy
Andouille








Since: 7.2.02
From: Huntington, NY

Since last post: 8 days
Last activity: 11 hours
#28 Posted on

    Originally posted by Pool-Boy
    I am sorry, $30 million is just not that much money, in the big picture. It is a small fraction (less than 1%) of the actual defecit. In comparison, it is far less than what we are paying to provide services to illegal aliens. How about those energy contracts he signed, condemning the state to pay 10x what the rest of this country is for electricity? How can anyone balk at $30 million being too much money when confronted with fiscal mismanagement like that? Hell, Davis is spending MORE than $30 million just to fight it. And, of course, the fact that he sells his signature to raise that kind of campaign money doesn't seem to bother any of his supporters.

    This state is just leaking money right now, and if $30 million will help plug the hole, I say I am all for it. I find it funny that the governor who is willing to spend the money to have a helicopter fly all the way down the state to pick him up so he could miss 2 hours of traffic is complaining about the cost of something to be quite funny.

    As far as the $60 million number goes... I have not heard any legitimate place that number came from. It was, however, the number that pollsters determined would be the figure that would most upset voters, and it has made its way into the pro-Davis talking points ever since. The Sec of State himself admits that the cost is going to be less than $30 million.

    No matter what- the money has been spent, there is no turning back now. Once the election was certified the $30 million is gone. Since we HAVE spent the money, we might as well make proper use of it. Are you really going to vote to keep a completely corrupt, totally inept governor in office just because you thought it cost too much to put the question on the ballot?

    (edited by Pool-Boy on 4.8.03 1152)



Please - totally corrupt? Name one thing, ONE THING, that he has done that is illegal. And I was against those energy contracts too (personally, I thought the state should have just taken over the plants rather than deal with those schmucks - but Davis lacked the huevos to do it).

Oh, and he's the ONLY politician selling his soul to win elections. You know, you Republicans love to look the other way when your commander in chief is using tax dollars to land on an aircraft carrier for a photo op - but when someone from the Democrats does it, y'all scream bloody murder. And we have forgotton that those big energy contracts that Davis signed were with Bush supporters (Sempra Energy, Duke Energy, etc). Oh, take a look at the make up of the FERC....

Here's a conservative columnist who better represents why the recall is terrible idea:

Say No to Davis Recall

In essence, he says this sets a very dangerous precedent - circumventing the Democratic process simply because you do not like the result of the last election. Davis is unpopular, won by a slight majority (but a majority nonetheless). The "Recall Davis" folks think they can capitalize on it.






"It's hard to be a prophet and still make a profit."
- Da Bush Babees

"Finally, a candidate who can explain the current administration's position on civil liberties in the original German."
- Bill Maher on Arnold Schwarzenneger
Pool-Boy
Lap cheong








Since: 1.8.02
From: Huntington Beach, CA

Since last post: 1253 days
Last activity: 19 days
AIM:  
ICQ:  
Y!:
#29 Posted on
One does not have to do ILLEGAL things to be corrupt. Sure it is LEGAL to sell your signature for campaign donations,but that does not make it right.

Oh, but the one illegal thing he has done? He tripled the car tax without a vote of any kind.

And a recall election is not circumventing the Democratic process, it is PART of the Democratic process.

Again, this is not a Liberal/Conservative issue. This is a compotence issue. Davis is inept. He has horribly mismanaged the budget (and lied about it to get re-elected), he screwed this state in the energy crisis, and has done everything in his power to open the state's doors to illegal immigrants. I couldn't care less if a Democrat took his place. Davis needs to go. You ask for one illegal thing Davis has done in office (even though this is not a criminal issue, it is a compotence issue). I ask you for one positive thing he has done for the state. Just one thing he has done to make life better for everyone here.

The freeways are jammed, with no new real construction. My electric bill is through the roof. New taxes are threatened around every corner. Buisnesses are leaving the state in droves. To me it is not "circumventing Democracy." It is stoping the destruction of the state before it gets any worse.





Still on the Shelf #17 - Pete, the P.O.'d Postal Worker
socalgail
Weisswurst








Since: 4.8.03
From: San Diego

Since last post: 3997 days
Last activity: 3842 days
#30 Posted on
So many inaccuracies, so little time. Let's just take two of the misstatements of fact in the preceding.
1-No one in CA is paying 10x the cost of electricity in another state. The national average per residential kWh is about $0.08 and in CA it is about $0.12. We are on the high end but this is not because of malfeasance by our present Governor. It is due to legislation passed by Pete Wilson and a Republican legislature that let us be the guinea pigs for deregulation. And where are those elected officials that voted for this? Term limits saw to it that they cannot be held accountable. We might just observe in passing that the energy lobbyists who helped usher this market based boondoggle in do not have term limits. Isn't hind sight wonderful. It makes geniuses of us all. At the time that the energy contracts were being negotiated, no one knew that the reason that prices were sky rocketing was due to illegal market manipulation. Davis' demands that the FERC impose price controls were ignored by the Bush appointees to the FERC. Bush issued dire warnings of energy shortages if price controls were put into effect. But when those controls were imposed, the energy crisis disappeared over night. This was what drove Enron into bankruptcy. Skelling resigned immediately after the FERC announced its decision. The party was over.

2-Illegal aliens are a problem, agreed. But it is up to the Feds and the INS to keep them out. Davis vetoed legislation that would have allowed illegals to driver's licenses despite tremendous pressure from other Dems to sign it into law. The reason illegals are here is to pick lettuce. Just before 9/11 Bush was working on a plan to provide amnesty for these illegals and to work out a deal with Vicente Fox to let more in, legally. One of the few industries to get a subsidy from the Feds was agribusiness. No wonder the farmers love Bush. Not only do they get subsidies, 51 billion dollars worth, but he wants to bring in more cheap labor to run the farms.

What I would really like to know is why, with the technology that we have at your fingertips to verify the accuracy of the charges aimed at Davis, so few people seem inclined to find out the truth.



socalgail
Grimis
Scrapple








Since: 11.7.02
From: MD

Since last post: 1207 days
Last activity: 1004 days
#31 Posted on | Instant Rating: 7.29
    Originally posted by socalgail
    1-No one in CA is paying 10x the cost of electricity in another state. The national average per residential kWh is about $0.08 and in CA it is about $0.12. We are on the high end but this is not because of malfeasance by our present Governor. It is due to legislation passed by Pete Wilson and a Republican legislature that let us be the guinea pigs for deregulation.

The problem with deregulation is that they fucked deregulation up; the state was at the time regulated how much they could charge to the consumer. Of course, when your a moronic governor who panics and pays 300% the market rate forcing the power companies to charge $35 per MW hour over negihboring states, that happens.


    Originally posted by socalgail
    Davis' demands that the FERC impose price controls were ignored by the Bush appointees to the FERC.

Yeah because government controlled prices solve everything, just like they stopped inflation in the 70's.


EDIT: Oh, and Cali bonds are now barely above junk bonds.

(edited by Grimis on 5.8.03 0921)

"Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch. Liberty is a well-armed lamb contesting the vote."
- Ben Franklin, 1759
ges7184
Lap cheong








Since: 7.1.02
From: Birmingham, AL

Since last post: 109 days
Last activity: 32 days
#32 Posted on

    Originally posted by Leroy

      Originally posted by Pool-Boy
      I am sorry, $30 million is just not that much money, in the big picture. It is a small fraction (less than 1%) of the actual defecit. In comparison, it is far less than what we are paying to provide services to illegal aliens. How about those energy contracts he signed, condemning the state to pay 10x what the rest of this country is for electricity? How can anyone balk at $30 million being too much money when confronted with fiscal mismanagement like that? Hell, Davis is spending MORE than $30 million just to fight it. And, of course, the fact that he sells his signature to raise that kind of campaign money doesn't seem to bother any of his supporters.

      This state is just leaking money right now, and if $30 million will help plug the hole, I say I am all for it. I find it funny that the governor who is willing to spend the money to have a helicopter fly all the way down the state to pick him up so he could miss 2 hours of traffic is complaining about the cost of something to be quite funny.

      As far as the $60 million number goes... I have not heard any legitimate place that number came from. It was, however, the number that pollsters determined would be the figure that would most upset voters, and it has made its way into the pro-Davis talking points ever since. The Sec of State himself admits that the cost is going to be less than $30 million.

      No matter what- the money has been spent, there is no turning back now. Once the election was certified the $30 million is gone. Since we HAVE spent the money, we might as well make proper use of it. Are you really going to vote to keep a completely corrupt, totally inept governor in office just because you thought it cost too much to put the question on the ballot?

      (edited by Pool-Boy on 4.8.03 1152)



    Please - totally corrupt? Name one thing, ONE THING, that he has done that is illegal. And I was against those energy contracts too (personally, I thought the state should have just taken over the plants rather than deal with those schmucks - but Davis lacked the huevos to do it).

    Oh, and he's the ONLY politician selling his soul to win elections. You know, you Republicans love to look the other way when your commander in chief is using tax dollars to land on an aircraft carrier for a photo op - but when someone from the Democrats does it, y'all scream bloody murder. And we have forgotton that those big energy contracts that Davis signed were with Bush supporters (Sempra Energy, Duke Energy, etc). Oh, take a look at the make up of the FERC....

    Here's a conservative columnist who better represents why the recall is terrible idea:

    Say No to Davis Recall

    In essence, he says this sets a very dangerous precedent - circumventing the Democratic process simply because you do not like the result of the last election. Davis is unpopular, won by a slight majority (but a majority nonetheless). The "Recall Davis" folks think they can capitalize on it.





I don't think it's correct to say that this is circumventing the Democratic process. This is an example of what you get you run mostly a pure democracy, which in California's case, has easily more democracy than any other state. I mean, in Tennessee, we have a ballot, it is extremely rare to have anything at all in addition to just office races, and when we do, it's just one thing (for example, the last one had a state lottery issue on it). In California, it always seems like they are voting for about 100 different laws (or 'propositions)on every ballot. Makes me wonder if the representives actually pass any laws on their own (I also wonder if this isn't part of the problem in California). This is the same deal, the laws are set up in a way that says, 'Hey, don't like the election, the voters can change it later'. Voters vote people in, they vote them out, it doesn't get much more democratic than that.

It would be more accurate to say that this is actually circumventing the representive republic system we have. However, it was these very same representives who put the laws on the books that allow this to happen, so they have no one to blame but themselves. Don't like how the laws are set up, change them, that's your job. However, the time to change them is BEFORE anybody starts the process. That way, you are objective, and not just trying to save your own ass (seemingly indicating that you were OK with the law, until it started affecting you).



Everything that is wrong in this world can be blamed on Freddie Prinze Jr.
socalgail
Weisswurst








Since: 4.8.03
From: San Diego

Since last post: 3997 days
Last activity: 3842 days
#33 Posted on

    Originally posted by Grimis
    The problem with deregulation is that they fucked deregulation up; the state was at the time regulated how much they could charge to the consumer...Yeah because government controlled prices solve everything, just like they stopped inflation in the 70's.


No, the problem with your argument is is that what is being regulated is important. A one size fits all economic policy is what gets us into trouble. Making schools accountable will not make stupid people into scholars. Whereas making commercially traded companies accountable prevents investors from investing in companies that are not making money. Inelastic commodities, like electicity which cannot be stored and which require infrastructure sized to peak demand do not do well in a market based economy, which is subject to price manipulation when suppliers withhold supplies to drive up prices. Unlike computer components which more closely follow the standard economic model of supply and demand. That is why places like LA county which have municipally owned and operated utilities have cheap power and places like San Diego which have privately owned and operated power companies pay top dollar.

(edited by CRZ on 6.8.03 0120)

socalgail
Michrome
Head cheese








Since: 2.1.03

Since last post: 3770 days
Last activity: 2837 days
#34 Posted on | Instant Rating: 0.00


    Wake up and figure out that if the Republican continue to rule, there will be no decent paying jobs in the US in the next 20 years. Lettuce picking anyone?


I find it hard to believe anyone could honestly believe this nonsense. Were you alive when we gained 20 million new jobs in the U.S. from 1980-1988 under Ronald Reagan? And no, the jobs weren't lettuce picking, real median family income grew by $4,000 during the Reagan period after experiencing no growth in the pre-Reagan years; it experienced a loss of almost $1,500 in the years following until the internet bubble came around. Basically, what I've gained from your posts about government price controls and such is that you believe that the free market does not work, and outside of Paul Krugman, you'll have a hard time finding an economist that would agree with this.
Grimis
Scrapple








Since: 11.7.02
From: MD

Since last post: 1207 days
Last activity: 1004 days
#35 Posted on | Instant Rating: 7.29

    Originally posted by socalgail
    A one size fits all economic policy is what gets us into trouble.
Which is what you're proposing we do becasue you go on to say...


    Originally posted by socalgail
    Whereas making commercially traded companies accountable prevents investors from investing in companies that are not making money.
This is so ludicrous that it's hard to start anywhere. If this were the case in business no startup company would ever be succesful because there would be no investors for anything since no startups make and realy money for at least five years. Of course, this also means major existing companies(Ford Motor, etc) would fold due to your proposed government restriction of investment.

Of course Krugman said on CNN last month "Clearly, tax cut after tax cut heavily targeted towards the wealthiest Americans doesn't do much to resolve the situation", which makes me chuckle that liberal economists don't understand the tax cuts....and the only other "economist" that all of this drivel sounds like is Marx.




Father: You see, son, we live in a liberal democratic society. The Democrats created sexual harassment law, which tells us what we can and cannot say in the workplace, and what we can and cannot do in the workplace.

Kyle: But isnt that fascism?

Father: No, because we dont call it fascism.
- South Park
godking
Chourico








Since: 20.10.02
From: Toronto

Since last post: 3843 days
Last activity: 3789 days
#36 Posted on
Of course Krugman said on CNN last month "Clearly, tax cut after tax cut heavily targeted towards the wealthiest Americans doesn't do much to resolve the situation", which makes me chuckle that liberal economists don't understand the tax cuts...

Kindly explain how tax cut after tax cut specifically targeted at the wealthy *does* resolve the situation, then, without resorting to the Laffer Curve, which has been proven unworkable outside of theory. Also explain how the United States is going to recover from its current nigh-unending deficit without raising taxes on the wealthy, as taxes on the wealthy (the group which benefits the most when a recession ends) are what got the US out of deficit and into budget surpluses in the mid-90s.

Practically every economist there is agrees that tax cuts are a good way to stimulate the economy, sure - but then they immediately say "so long as those tax cuts are targeted towards those most likely to inject their funds directly back into the economy," which means the lower and middle classes.
MoeGates
Andouille








Since: 6.1.02
From: Brooklyn, NY

Since last post: 2 days
Last activity: 2 days
#37 Posted on | Instant Rating: 6.28
I am sorry, $30 million is just not that much money, in the big picture. It is a small fraction (less than 1%) of the actual defecit.

I really want to hear this argument out of you (or any small-govt. type) the next time you point out one of those silly-sounding things the government spent a few hundred thou on as proof of how the the government wastes our taxpayer dollars right and left and we can afford 800 million in tax cuts if we just cut out funding research for the sex lives of ants or whatever.

which makes me chuckle that liberal economists don't understand the tax cuts

There is a big difference between "don't understand" and "don't accept the libertarian party line." Honestly, you know how you complain about the Liberal bias in Social Sciences in college or whatever? Take a look at how you consider your arguments the gospel truth about economics, and whoever doesn't agree must just be uninformed about the subject, or else a communist. I suspect you'll find yourself sounding eerily like that Poli-Sci Professor of yours in college, just from the other side.



"I'm sorry, I didn't think I was going to talk about 'man on dog' with a United States Senator. It's sort of freaking me out."


Associated Press interview with Senator Rick Santorum (R-PA), 04-07-2003.
tshman122
Polska kielbasa








Since: 20.6.03

Since last post: 4025 days
Last activity: 3828 days
AIM:  
#38 Posted on
http://cnn.netscape.cnn.com/news/default.jsp
This is the next Governor.
godking
Chourico








Since: 20.10.02
From: Toronto

Since last post: 3843 days
Last activity: 3789 days
#39 Posted on
I personally can't wait for everybody who opined about the stupidity of Jerry Springer's aborted Senate big to say how stupid THIS is.
Big Bad
Scrapple








Since: 4.1.02
From: Dorchester, Ontario

Since last post: 1 day
Last activity: 7 hours
#40 Posted on | Instant Rating: 5.54
Anyone else find it disturbing that, conceivably, one out of every 25 US governors starred in Predator?




Colin Mochrie


Which 'Whose Line is it Anyway?' actor are you!?
brought to you by Quizilla
Pages: Prev 1 2 3 4 5 Next
Pages: Prev 1 2 3 4 5 NextThread ahead: Republicans and Democrats Can't Avoid Homosexual Politics--But Where are the Votes?
Next thread: The Petroleum Age
Previous thread: Denver to vote on Anti-Stress Initiative
(1890 newer) Next thread | Previous thread
http://www.nbc10.com/news/4026938/detail.html
- vonLampertheim, First video of tsunami (2004)
Related threads: CRZ for Governor - Semi-interesting headline writing - Hope For Californians, Entertainment for the Rest of Us - More...
The W - Current Events & Politics - Presenting California's next governor... (Page 2)Register and log in to post!

The W™ message board

ZimBoard
©2001-2014 Brothers Zim

This old hunk of junk rendered your page in 0.262 seconds.