Governor Schwarzenneger!

[Pyser]

unbelievable.

as of right now, msnbc and cnn are reporting almost certain victory for arnold.

um....wow.

[Tasan]

Did this happen in the last big election, and then they promissed to never ever call it before at least half the votes were counted? Anyone??? CNN is calling it just on EXIT POLLS.

[Blackadar]

Cool. Yes, this is ME saying cool for a Republican candidate. Good riddance, Davis.

[Ksyrup]

First Jesse Ventura, now Arnold. Unbelievable. And people have the nerve to laugh at my state. I mean, I'm all for less Democrats in positions of power, but...!

I guess this gives new meaning to the saying "I'm looking California, but feeling Minnesota."

[Easy Mac]

quick question for the Californians.

If you vote no on the recall, do you still vote for a candidate at the bottom?

If not, I would think that the Democrats could sue for the disenfranchisement of millions of voters. Essentially, only 2/3 of those voting would have a say in who is governor. Isn't this holding 2 elections for the same seat? It seems that those who vote for the recall are being given 2 votes. This looks to be very unconstitutional.

Am I just thinking too far out the box, or is this a concern that has somehow avoided everyone else?

[Easy Mac]

Oh, and if only I could be in the governors ball after party tonight.... the stories I could tell.... mmmmm Maria Shriver in a thong.

[sabotai]

I'm supposed to be happy that Davis is out...but for some reason, I just can't be...I dunno why.


Oh yeah, because a fuckin puppet has been put in there instead. Something tells me this is a lose-lose situation for California...I sorry. I mean KALYfornia.

Ksyrup, just to make you feel better, I've always laughed harder at Cal than at any other state.

[sabotai]

dola,

Easy, I agree with you. It's a horrible set up. They should either seperate the two, have the recall on one date and the election for the replacement on another, or they shoudl throw Davis on the ballot and just have an election.

I'm willing to bet that more people voted No to the recall than those who voted for Arnold.

[Ksyrup]

Originally posted by Easy Mac
quick question for the Californians.

If you vote no on the recall, do you still vote for a candidate at the bottom?

If not, I would think that the Democrats could sue for the disenfranchisement of millions of voters. Essentially, only 2/3 of those voting would have a say in who is governor. Isn't this holding 2 elections for the same seat? It seems that those who vote for the recall are being given 2 votes. This looks to be very unconstitutional.

Am I just thinking too far out the box, or is this a concern that has somehow avoided everyone else?

You still vote for a replacement, even if you vote to keep Davis.

[Easy Mac]

just making sure

[damnMikeBrown]

What a joke. Geez, glad I nixed the San Diego thing. . .I'd be embarassed to live there. Hell, I'm kind of embarassed that I thought about it now. . .

[mckerney]

Originally posted by Ksyrup
First Jesse Ventura, now Arnold. Unbelievable. And people have the nerve to laugh at my state. I mean, I'm all for less Democrats in positions of power, but...!

I guess this gives new meaning to the saying "I'm looking California, but feeling Minnesota."

I can assure you, there is no way that Arnold can be as bad as Ventura was up here. Impossible.

[Swaggs]

We need a new news story now....

[mckerney]

Originally posted by Swaggs
We need a new news story now....

So, the Cubs lost.

[MrBug708]

Actually, Arnold has more votes then people are voting no

More people are also voting to recall Davis than those who voted to elect him

Based on numbers of course

[Easy Mac]

They just had Jesse Jackson on CNN.

He looks like a Pound Puppy.

[WussGawd]

Ah, well, at last the Republicans now have a man in office who can explain the Reichstag Fire, er, Patriot Act in the original German.

[sabotai]

"I can assure you, there is no way that Arnold can be as bad as Ventura was up here. Impossible."

What did Ventura do that was so bad?

[MrBug708]

Jackson, before Cruz had even conceded, said that he has seen "Strong" evidence that there has been a great deal of voter disenfranchisement

[damnMikeBrown]

This is a giant step forward for H.S. athletics in CA. No longer will the nation's universities look towards FL as the king of college talent. With Dianabol & Testosterone cocktails now mandatory for H.S. atletes, CA will have a clear edge.

[GrantDawg]

Gray Davis' concession speech really isn't leaving a lot of room to continue to fight. He is definitely conceeding. It might be that someone else will continue the fight, but it sure doesn't sound like Davis will.

[GrantDawg]

And on another note: How the heck did Arnold get 50% of the vote? If that stands as some are suggesting, that is amazing. It looks a whole lot like the "bimbo eruptions" coming daily from the LA Times actually pushed him higher. I think Arnold ought to send them a thank you letter for their attempt to assassinate his candidacy basically killed all the challengers.

[timmynausea]

Originally posted by WussGawd
Ah, well, at last the Republicans now have a man in office who can explain the Reichstag Fire, er, Patriot Act in the original German.

Alright. This is officially the best Arnold joke so far. Who will step forward and top it?

[Easy Mac]

Does anyone else notice all the women standing on the Schwarzy stage? what are the odds that 90% are groped by the end of the night.

I'll start its at 1-9.

[MrBug708]

Maria Shriver looks like Skeletor

[Glengoyne]

Originally posted by WussGawd
Ah, well, at last the Republicans now have a man in office who can explain the Reichstag Fire, er, Patriot Act in the original German.

Setting the misguided political sentiment behind this joke aside, I too second it as the best Arnold joke so far.

[Glengoyne]

Originally posted by MrBug708
Maria Shriver looks like Skeletor

That gave me a very descriptive visual image, and strangely enough I still think she is hot.

[Easy Mac]

Hmmm, skeletor and He-Man are together. This can't be a coincidence.

[mckerney]

Originally posted by Glengoyne
That gave me a very descriptive visual image, and strangely enough I still think she is hot.

[fantastic flying froggies]

Only in America can a former austrian bodybuilder turned Hollywood actor become governor of the 6th most powerful country (equivalent) in the world...

[JeeberD]

Originally posted by mckerney
So, the Cubs lost.

[Mustang]

The 'Demolition Man' it's... it's.. IT'S COMING TRUE! Oh the humanity.... I don't want to sing the Oscar Mayer song and drink Banana Broccoli shakes....






"Hold it! The Schwarzenegger Library?"
"Yes, the Schwarzenegger Presidential Library. Wasn't he an actor?"
"Stop! He was President?"
"Yes. Even though he was not born in this country, his popularity at the time caused the 61st Amendment…"

[QuikSand]

I think the biggest thing is now that the dust has (maybe) settled on the "election," what the hell is he going to do? He refused to say anything affirmative about what he planned to do to get the state's fiscal house in order - onl;y to rule out things that are particularly iunpalatable. Okay - eliminate the new car tax, won't raise any taxes, won't cut funding to schools... okay, got it. That gets you elected.

Now what?

[Bee]

Originally posted by QuikSand
I think the biggest thing is now that the dust has (maybe) settled on the "election," what the hell is he going to do? He refused to say anything affirmative about what he planned to do to get the state's fiscal house in order - onl;y to rule out things that are particularly iunpalatable. Okay - eliminate the new car tax, won't raise any taxes, won't cut funding to schools... okay, got it. That gets you elected.

Now what?

Beat up the other governors and take their money to balance the California budget?

[GrantDawg]

Originally posted by QuikSand
I think the biggest thing is now that the dust has (maybe) settled on the "election," what the hell is he going to do? He refused to say anything affirmative about what he planned to do to get the state's fiscal house in order - onl;y to rule out things that are particularly iunpalatable. Okay - eliminate the new car tax, won't raise any taxes, won't cut funding to schools... okay, got it. That gets you elected.

Now what?

Fail miserably, but still end up being a popular governor.

[Super Ugly]

Didn't California have the opportunity to elect that little guy from 'Diff'rent Strokes?'

And you all let that chance pass you by?

No wonder us Europeans look down upon America with such contempt.



(Gary Coleman for President)

[Buccaneer]

The scariest thing, imo, is that many people still look these politicians/lawyers/figureheads/etc. to do something. Much of the problems California (and other parts of the US) has is that they did something that screwed it up - whether in conflicting social legislations, ornerous business taxes and regulations, restictive growth policies and on and on. The best thing the new Governor can try to do (to spur economics, education and infrastructure) is to
1) cut needless programs (can save billions),
2) provide tax-reduction incentives (to promote business growth = jobs),
3) put money into school infrastructure (not in the bureaucracy),
4) reduce business regulations that drove many companies out-of-state or overseas (esp. utilities),
5) and basically get the State govt out of local government issues.

But with that State legislature and with many folks wanting the govt. to solve all of their problems, that will not happen.

Simplistic, yes but a mindset in truthfully knowing what caused the problems in the first place.

[mckerney]

Originally posted by Buccaneer
The scariest thing, imo, is that many people still look these politicians/lawyers/figureheads/etc. to do something. Much of the problems California (and other parts of the US) has is that they did something that screwed it up - whether in conflicting social legislations, ornerous business taxes and regulations, restictive growth policies and on and on. The best thing the new Governor can try to do (to spur economics, education and infrastructure) is to
1) cut needless programs (can save billions),
2) provide tax-reduction incentives (to promote business growth = jobs),
3) put money into school infrastructure (not in the bureaucracy),
4) reduce business regulations that drove many companies out-of-state or overseas (esp. utilities),
5) and basically get the State govt out of local government issues.

But with that State legislature and with many folks wanting the govt. to solve all of their problems, that will not happen.

Simplistic, yes but a mindset in truthfully knowing what caused the problems in the first place.

6) Stop giving illegal aliens drivers licenses?

[cthomer5000]

Total Recall indeed.

If the World Series is Red Sox-Cubs I may start to believe the end of the world talk....

[QuikSand]

Originally posted by Buccaneer
The best thing the new Governor can try to do (to spur economics, education and infrastructure) is to

1) cut needless programs (can save billions)

Okay - that's a wonderful campaign stump speech, the crowd roared with approval. They love you, Governor-elect Buccaneer, since you have promised to cut billions of dollars in needless programs, which obviously won't bother anyone at all (why else woudl they be needless?).

So, now that you're about to take office, and the votes have been counted... do you have any hints as to what programs those are? I'm not asking you for a professional, detailed assessment of the Cali budget. No, just in general terms... where are these billions of dollars in needless programs being wasted?

I'm sure the Governors of other states, even the most conservative and "cut-inclined" among them (who are all still wrangling with budget problems of their own), would be absolutely thrilled to find a painless 5% or so of their budget to eliminate without causing any trouble. California can be a beacon for all of them-- cut here, and solve your troubles!

So, where are we going to go?

[Subby]

The only thing this proves it that if you appeared in Predator then there is a good chance you will be elected Governor of something someday.

[WussGawd]

Originally posted by cthomer5000
Total Recall indeed.

If the World Series is Red Sox-Cubs I may start to believe the end of the world talk....

Hmm.

1. War in the Middle East.
2. Mediocre action actor with questionable drug and sex history governor of California.
3. Red Sox and Cubs both four victories away from meeting each other in the Middle East.

Personally, folks, if I see a rain of toads today, I'm outta here.

[QuikSand]

Originally posted by Subby
The only thing this proves it that if you appeared in Predator then there is a good chance you will be elected Governor of something someday.

Where does Carl Weathers reside?

[CraigSca]

Originally posted by WussGawd
Hmm.

1. War in the Middle East.
2. Mediocre action actor with questionable drug and sex history governor of California.
3. Red Sox and Cubs both four victories away from meeting each other in the Middle East.

Personally, folks, if I see a rain of toads today, I'm outta here.

Aren't the first two listed ALWAYS in effect? The only one that scares me is #3.

[WussGawd]

Originally posted by Glengoyne
Setting the misguided political sentiment behind this joke aside, I too second it as the best Arnold joke so far.

It's not misguided at all. We lost a lot more of our political freedoms on October 1 when the second phase of this ridiculous overreaction to 9/11 began, and the dangerous thing about bureaucracies is that once given powers, they are very reticent to give them back.

I shudder for the long term future of the tattered remnants of the Bill of Rights.

Remember the words of probably the wisest of our founding fathers, Benjamin Franklin. "They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety."

Nonetheless, I accept the complement.

[Mustang]

Originally posted by WussGawd
Personally, folks, if I see a rain of toads today, I'm outta here.

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmp...sc/frog_eggs_4

[Bing]

Originally posted by QuikSand
Okay - that's a wonderful campaign stump speech, the crowd roared with approval. They love you, Governor-elect Buccaneer, since you have promised to cut billions of dollars in needless programs, which obviously won't bother anyone at all (why else woudl they be needless?).

So, now that you're about to take office, and the votes have been counted... do you have any hints as to what programs those are? I'm not asking you for a professional, detailed assessment of the Cali budget. No, just in general terms... where are these billions of dollars in needless programs being wasted?

I'm sure the Governors of other states, even the most conservative and "cut-inclined" among them (who are all still wrangling with budget problems of their own), would be absolutely thrilled to find a painless 5% or so of their budget to eliminate without causing any trouble. California can be a beacon for all of them-- cut here, and solve your troubles!

So, where are we going to go?

California is different from other states in that an absolute ton of money is spent on enforcing standards (mainly environmental) that are not applicable anywhere else (anyone familiar with California emmissions laws, by chance?). Without having a copy of the state budget laying around, I'd guess that (conceptually) there's a whole lot of money that could be saved by moving back towards the middle on these issues. By merely holding companies to the same standars as other states, the goodwill towards business should bring additional untold millions to the tax base without harming the environment any worse that anywhere else.

That said, coastal Californians (read: the ones who voted "no" on the recall) will set the environment as a primary battleground issue in the next election (thus ignoring the good done to the almost hopeless budget situation that exists at the present).

It looks like there's room to do what needs to be done. To pull line out of the democratic script manual, tough choices will have to be made.

[KWhit]

I hate politics.

[clintl]

Originally posted by Buccaneer
The scariest thing, imo, is that many people still look these politicians/lawyers/figureheads/etc. to do something. Much of the problems California (and other parts of the US) has is that they did something that screwed it up - whether in conflicting social legislations, ornerous business taxes and regulations, restictive growth policies and on and on. The best thing the new Governor can try to do (to spur economics, education and infrastructure) is to
1) cut needless programs (can save billions),
2) provide tax-reduction incentives (to promote business growth = jobs),
3) put money into school infrastructure (not in the bureaucracy),
4) reduce business regulations that drove many companies out-of-state or overseas (esp. utilities),
5) and basically get the State govt out of local government issues.

But with that State legislature and with many folks wanting the govt. to solve all of their problems, that will not happen.

Simplistic, yes but a mindset in truthfully knowing what caused the problems in the first place.

You have a lot of this wrong, Bucc. A huge part of the problem is that over 50% of the state budget is not even discretionary, and the voters here are the ones responsible for that. They have, on numerous occasions over the years through initiatives, earmarked big parts of the budget for specific purposes. Most of these initiatives were constitutional amendments that cannot be oveturned without another initiative.

Point by point comments:

1) This is always a trite and cliched comment, until you ask people for specifics, and they can't provide any examples. If you have some, elaborate, please.

2) Contrary to popular belief, California ranks near the national average with respect to taxes per income earned. High taxes are not the problem, although some people may think so because the tax structure here is different than in most states. The part that people fail to take into account is that California has extremely low property taxes thanks to Proposition 13. This is especially true for business, because there are loopholes in Proposition 13 that allow commercial property (unlike residential property) to not be automatically reassessed when ownership changes. Business is already getting a huge tax break there.

3) I have started doing some substitute teaching this year, and it has given me a chance to look around at schools at all levels. And you know what? There is no huge administration. In fact, there are very few employees who are not teachers at the schools. Furthermore, to apply, I had to visit the district office, and there aren't very many people working there, either, and it's not a very big place. I have yet to encounter anyone doing a job that didn't need to be done. My impression so far is that the administration is as lean or leaner than any of the private sector companies that I've worked for (and I've worked in the private sector my entire career).

4) Regulations did not drive utilities out of the state. Deregulation invited them in to steal our money. Had there been no deregulation in the first place, we probably would have been a lot better off. Could a deregulation plan work? Maybe. However, I think it should be noted here that people served by publicly owned municipal utilities that opted out of the deregulation plan fared pretty well during the crisis. The public sector did a much better job of managing themselves and keeping rates for their customers low.

As far as companies leaving the state, it is not at a rate any faster than the national average over the last few years, and I know first hand about companies shipping jobs offshore. And I can assure you that nothing the state could have done would stop that. They are moving jobs offshore because of labor costs, something that is happening in every other state. The bottom line is that there in no place in the US that can compete with offshore labor rates for the kinds of jobs that are moving, and no easy solution to prevent them from moving.

5) Because of Proposition 13, local governments no longer have the financial means to be somewhat independent of the state. Property taxes, which are the main source of funding here for local governments, are not sufficient to cover the costs of local services, and the allowed assessment increases each year are not high enough to keep up with inflation (I'm talking CPI, here, not real estate appreciation). And it's very difficult for local governments to raise these rates. Furthermore, they still have to reduce assessments to market value if property values go down, as they did in the early and mid '90s. That's not a problem right now where I live, as in the Sacramento area, property values have been going up very fast the last few years. However, in some parts of the state, I think they have been falling a little. So, as time progresses, the local governments become more and more financially dependent on the state.

[QuikSand]

Originally posted by Bing
California is different from other states in that an absolute ton of money is spent on enforcing standards (mainly environmental) that are not applicable anywhere else (anyone familiar with California emmissions laws, by chance?). Without having a copy of the state budget laying around, I'd guess that (conceptually) there's a whole lot of money that could be saved by moving back towards the middle on these issues. By merely holding companies to the same standars as other states, the goodwill towards business should bring additional untold millions to the tax base without harming the environment any worse that anywhere else.

Very sensible argument.

Most states manage to have their various environmental protection programs be more or less "self-supporting" -- that the costs of the inspectors and so forth are essentially borne by the revenues from fines and fees paid by the regulated community. I don't know if this is the case in California.

If it is, then while there might be economic benefits from relaxing these many standards, there may not be the budgetary financial windfalls that we'd hope for. Again, I don't knwo enough about California's structure to say - but it's possible that this amounts to a near-wash in terms of the state budget.