Originally posted by: Jaskalas
Originally posted by: Craig234
Californians put our current Republican governor, Arnold, in office when they recalled the previous governor, a democrat, for no good reason, after having elected a number of republican governors, mostly bad.
No good reason? As if making the state go bankrupt isn't reason enough.
The hilarious part of it all is that Arnold is allowing the same legislature to spend so it really doesn't matter - and in fact we should have left governor Davis in office just like Karl Rove warned us to. Because then it would have kept the Democratic face on the Democratic Party?s utter failure in CA.
Now there has been a delay, however small, and a Republican face to pin on the state?s economic collapse.
Yet wait, isn't this topic regarding voting? Yes, Arnold is a true example that Republicans can elect someone to office, but to call HIM a Republican would be a disgrace in of itself. He is RINO and I oppose any concept that he belongs to the same party I do.
He was placed into office to be a roadblock to the populous bankruptcy and he has instead bowed to it. To hell with him, his legacy will be a small bump in California?s fall. Shouldn?t even be worthy of recognition. Arnold has failed to do anything other than look at himself in the mirror ? he is an example in that you can betray your base you to get elected. Much like Bush.
The previous governor did not 'make the state go bankrupt'. And the election was not about that. The election was about two things - one, the impact Enron had, which was ironic since Enron, George Bush's single biggest donor, was Republican and took particular pleasure in targeting the democratic state of California, and the governor then was their *enemy*, refusing to sign off on a sweetheart deal Enron had worked out with the Bush administration, and Arnold, the 'fix' for Enron, was actually an Enron insider who had gone to a secret invitiation-only meeting with Enron to plan their California strategy, and he couldn't sign the deal fast enough.
The other issue was Davis' increase in DMV fees, which was specifically FOR fiscal responsibility, but oh noes, was a tax increase.
(A third issue was an attack on Davis' honesty, much like the attacks calling Al Gore a big liar in 2000, saying he'd taken too much money from special interests. Arnold specifically promised not to do that while attacking Davis, saying his independent wealth would let him pay the bills out of his own pocket - and then when elected, he took MORE special interest money than Davis ever had, while the Republican sheep are blind and bleating 'soooo whatttt soooo whattttt').
No, there was no good reason to recall Davis for fighting the good fight on Enron and getting the blame for what they did, to replace him with Enron buddy Arnold.
Arnold is the sort of candidate who can do ok in CA, insofar as having enough for both sides (remember, this is the state that elected Ronald Reagan and Jerry Brown adjacent). He tried to sell out the public and perhaps surprisingly got caught, with his ballot initiatives all of which lost, and since then he's concentrated more on the public-interest issues of the environment and infrastructure in his visible political activity. Republicans aren't terribly pleased with him but are happy to have a Republican at all slowing the legislature.
On the other hand, he's blocked some excellent bills, and we're really paying a price for losing Davis; for one, Arnold is now blocking a high speed rail from SF to LA and San Diego. Arnold has blocked some excellent social legislation as well, preventing CA from leading the nation as it usually has on such topics. Some of his vetoes are more defensible.
Edit:
The recall campaign did include controversy over the state's deficit and Davis' plans for addressing the deficit -
here's a link to a typical ad for the Davis opponents identifying their reasons for recalling him. Note they cite the *deceipt* they say was involved about the deficit, and they criticize his plans for addressing it with tax increases and budget cuts, but you don't see "HE BANKRUPTED THE STATE!" as one of their five issues.
Big surprise, Davis' hands weren't entirely clean; for example, the prison guard union in CA has too much political role, balancing the Republicans' special interest donors.
Things aren't going to be perfect, because power is not evenly shared in society. But there's a difference between moderate compromises, and huge sellouts of the public interest.
Seriously, I think we can use some more 'why are you in your party' discussions, because I think a lot of people fall for the propaganda parties use to recruit voters and are unaware of some of their party's real policies. They're the 'sheep', the 'masses', the 'dupes' who are marketed to.
Facebook
Twitter