home

Calif: Resounding Defeat for Arnold's Props

By Jeralyn, Section Elections
Posted on Wed Nov 09, 2005 at 07:29:29 AM EST
Tags: (all tags)
Share This: Digg! StumbleUpon del.icio.us reddit reddit

All four ballot initiatives backed by Calif. Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger failed at the polls yesterday.

Voters turned down his plans to curb state spending, redraw California's political map, restrain union politics and lengthen the time it takes teachers to get tenure. Voters also rejected four other statewide initiatives, including one requiring parental approval for a minor's abortion.

< Swift Boating Joseph Wilson Won't Work | Torture Amendment Thoughts >

  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


    • Display: Sort:
    Calif: Resounding Defeat for Arnold's Props | 36 comments (36 topical)
    Re: Calif: Resounding Defeat for Arnold's Props (none / 0) (#1)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:05:52 PM EST
    LOL...well the Sate of Cal has spoken. They don't want to curb spending.. Redraw the political map.... Not restrain union politics... Continue to give teachers tenure too early... And let minors get abortions without parents knowledge... No wonder Cal is one of the most f-ed up states around... And TL is trumpeting this?

    Re: Calif: Resounding Defeat for Arnold's Props (none / 0) (#2)
    by Che's Lounge on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:05:52 PM EST
    BB, Do you live in CA? Curb spending? You mean cutting social programs. Reagan did that too and we still have to deal with the consequences. Redraw the political map? You mean let 3 retirees turn us red. Well, it worked for Delay! Not restrain unions? It's not unions that stole billions of our dollars in energy profits and pension funds. It's your corporate buddies that need to be restrained - chemically. Teacher tenure? When was the last time you put your future into a career only to be placed on initial probation for 5 years? You want us to believe that teachers can't be fired? Pulease! And I'm sure school administrators would have been fair in their new power position to fire at will. Let minors get abortions? That is NOT the law, or the premise of Prop 73. The LAW is there to protect the privacy of EVERY citizen. Not just father rapists. But you care not about privacy. This special election was shoved down the throats CA voters by a republican governor whose Pll numbers make Bush look good. And we just blew the chunks back into Arnie's face. Congratulations to the voters of CA.

    Re: Calif: Resounding Defeat for Arnold's Props (none / 0) (#3)
    by Patrick on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:05:52 PM EST
    If nothing changes, nothing changes. At least the Governor is trying to make changes, and changes that had overwhelming support intially. It just proves that it's easy to confuse and lie to voters who get ther information from TV ads instead of reading the text of the propostitions. Many will claim it's a victory, but who won? I believe politicians are the one who can claim victory, at the expense of the people once again.

    Re: Calif: Resounding Defeat for Arnold's Props (none / 0) (#4)
    by Patrick on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:05:52 PM EST
    Redraw the political map? You mean let 3 retirees turn us red. Well, it worked for Delay!
    Or blue, or green for that matter, of 157 races in the last election, none changed hands. Because district lines were gerrymandered by both parties. If a representative (republican or democrat) is not responsive to the needs of their constituency, they should face the possibility of being voted out. Republicans didn't want it becuase they feared losing the majority on the federal level. Che quick, before you go read up on it. Do you know how the three judges were going to be chosen? Judge Wapner wouldn't have made it.

    Re: Calif: Resounding Defeat for Arnold's Props (none / 0) (#5)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:05:52 PM EST
    Che... No I don't live in Cal... but have relatives & friends that do. You mean cutting social programs. No... I mean curb 'out of control' spending... why did you focus on social programs? But .. as long as you brought it up... should taxpayers have to fund teaching illegal aliens Spanish in American schools for example? You mean let 3 retirees turn us red. LOL..don't worry...with all the hollywood types & other lefty loonies there...you'll NEVER be red! It's your corporate buddies that need to be restrained - I'll agree with that. But having been in 4 seperate unions... I can also tell you they are worthless. You want us to believe that teachers can't be fired? Pulease! Well..it takes an act of congress to get teachers out of there. I can think of a few when I was in school that had no business teaching kids but couldn't be touched. My ex wife is a teacher so I know how that works. (See my comment about unions above) The LAW is there to protect the privacy of EVERY citizen. .... But you care not about privacy. We are talking about minors here! Their privacy is secondary to the adults that are responsible for them. Congratulations to the voters of CA. Yes...you got the Government you deserve.

    Re: Calif: Resounding Defeat for Arnold's Props (none / 0) (#6)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:05:52 PM EST
    Patrick and BB, STFU if you don't know what you are talking about. The people of California have spoken and this is what they have decided. It is funny to me that Rethuglicans only like democracy when it goes their way. When the outcome doesn't fit their warped outlook on life they chalk it up to the masses being "fooled" by politicians. Which is another way of saying "The citizenry is too stupid to decide for themselves so we should decide for them". Kind of sounds like the characterizations of Democrats that the Right(Wrong) Wing loves to spew. My, my who are the elitists now, PnBB? Get over it, P n BB. The people who live in that state aren't falling for the load of crap Herr Gropenator is trying to feed them. They have seen first hand what an ineffectual and hypocritical governor Ahnold has turned out to be, and they are letting him know his days are numbered.

    Re: Calif: Resounding Defeat for Arnold's Props (none / 0) (#7)
    by Patrick on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:05:52 PM EST
    STFU if you don't know what you are talking about. The people of California have spoken and this is what they have decided.
    My my my, sensitive this morning aren't we? Yes that's what the people decided after $113 million in ads that mislead and deceived.
    Rethuglicans only like democracy when it goes their way.
    I only like it when it works. If a republican rep is not responsive, then, by all means replace them with a demo. Just give it a chance to happen.
    "The citizenry is too stupid to decide for themselves so we should decide for them". Kind of sounds like the characterizations of Democrats that the Right(Wrong) Wing loves to spew. My, my who are the elitists now, PnBB?
    Not sutpid, just duped and misinformed. Most people supported these reforms and still do, they were just misrepresented by the politicans and power brokers. Nice to see you supporting the status quo in California. But Sherm your side won, but since I voted I do not have to STFU. Nice chatting with you. As Paul in LA would say....This election was stolen! hahhahaha Funny how elections are infallible when they turn out your way.

    Re: Calif: Resounding Defeat for Arnold's Props (none / 0) (#8)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:05:52 PM EST
    Shermbuck... I personally don't give a rat's patoot what they do in Cal. Like I said... they got the Government they deserve. The people who live in that state aren't falling for the load of crap Too late.. they already fell for the libs load of crap years ago...which is way the states in the shape it's in now! As far as Arnold is concerned... Maybe you'd rather have Davis back? He was doing such a fine job wasn't he?... LMAO

    Re: Calif: Resounding Defeat for Arnold's Props (none / 0) (#9)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:05:52 PM EST
    I *AM* a California voter. My take: Proposition 73: People figured out that the best way to protect their daughters and know what's going on in their lives is to... er... talk to them and have a good relationship with them, and that adding a line to the State Constitution defining abortion as causing "the death of the unborn child, a child conceived but not yet born" didn't really enter into it. People complain about "activist judges" as it is -- they don't want one making intimate family decisions for them. Proposition 74: Most states in this country have a probationary period for teachers of THREE years. Five years was overreaching. Try again, eh? Proposition 75: People recognized that it wasn't fair to stop unions from being able to campaign -- especially since members can already opt out of having their dues go towards political spending -- while letting corporations have free reign. (No, unions are far from perfect. But if you think companies are just going to do the right thing on their own with no outside prompting, I have a few bridges to sell you. The old Eastern Span of the Bay Bridge will soon be available after they're done building the new one.) Proposition 76: I agree that we need to do something about our budget. It's really bad and can't keep going like this. But raising taxes hasn't even been on the table, and that's ridiculous. Plus, we've already seen what happened to another state that tried this route... Colorado found itself in such a deep hole, its voters just voted to gut their version of 76 (TABOR) -- and their REPUBLICAN governor agrees with them! Proposition 77: I'm with Talking Points Memo. Gerrymandering is bad; our current system isn't great. But the timing was also not right (census data is now 6 years old) and the motives were suspicious. The plan didn't even promise an outcome of competitive districts! If this thing is worth doing, it's worth doing right. This wasn't right. Proposition 78: I'd rather not have drug companies "voluntarily" running a drug program for low-income people. Try again? 79 and 80: I don't have much to say about them, but initiatives are really not the best way of crafting policy. I think everyone just got cranky and started rubber-stamping NO!!! on everything after a while. And BB, I'm not sure where you live, but I'll just say that it seems this entire country have gotten the government that *YOU* deserve.

    Re: Calif: Resounding Defeat for Arnold's Props (none / 0) (#10)
    by Patrick on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:05:52 PM EST
    Proposition 75: People recognized that it wasn't fair to stop unions from being able to campaign -- especially since members can already opt out of having their dues go towards political spending --
    Prop 75 stopped unions from campaigning? Wow, that's news to me. I thought Prop 75 only changed the default campaign contribution of public employees from automatic to with their permission. Yes I can see how unions would need to force their members to remit PAC money. P.S. I've been trying to have my union stop deducting PAC money from my dues for quite some time. Funny how the leadership is too nusy to get it. Oh and I forgot about the closed shop rule, and the legel defense fund money that I would no longer be allowed to have access to, yep I can opt out at will.

    Re: Calif: Resounding Defeat for Arnold's Props (none / 0) (#11)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:05:52 PM EST
    I voted yes on the first 5 and no on the last 3. That the rest of Cali agreed with me on 3 out of 8, is, to me, remarkable. Or, perhaps what is more remarkable is how effective instilling doubt in the minds of voters is, if you want them not to vote for something.

    Re: Calif: Resounding Defeat for Arnold's Props (none / 0) (#12)
    by Che's Lounge on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:05:52 PM EST
    BB, Did you also stay at a Holiday Inn last night? CA is not perfect but ASs's "solutions" were not that at all. They were power grabs. Kaaleefornians saw right through it. And he only cost us 200 million. That's a great way to curb spending.

    Re: Calif: Resounding Defeat for Arnold's Props (none / 0) (#13)
    by Che's Lounge on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:05:52 PM EST
    Patrick, So opt out of the union. I'm in CTA. We have a choice. Don't you? Or is the union valuable to you only when you need it?

    Re: Calif: Resounding Defeat for Arnold's Props (none / 0) (#14)
    by Patrick on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:05:52 PM EST
    Che, My legal defense fund is what is valuable to me, but that amounts to 14 dollars a month out of my $68 per month dues. I cannot, not be a member of the union and have legal defense. So effectively the cost of that insurance is more than quadrupled. There are many in my union that feel the same way, but many are not in my position and do have to worry about subtle game playing such as intimidation and being ostracized. Well, perhaps it's not so subtle.

    Re: Calif: Resounding Defeat for Arnold's Props (none / 0) (#15)
    by Patrick on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:05:52 PM EST
    Che, Doesn't the CTA "encourage" membership?

    Re: Calif: Resounding Defeat for Arnold's Props (none / 0) (#16)
    by Patrick on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:05:53 PM EST
    CA is not perfect but ASs's "solutions" were not that at all. They were power grabs. Kaaleefornians saw right through it.
    Power grabs? Let me be the first to say, I wouldn't put that past either political party to try that, but I just didn't see that as the underlying scheme of this election. I saw almost the opposite.

    Re: Calif: Resounding Defeat for Arnold's Props (none / 0) (#17)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:05:53 PM EST
    Power grabs? Let me be the first to say, I wouldn't put that past either political party to try that, but I just didn't see that as the underlying scheme of this election. I saw almost the opposite.
    Oh please. Where were the pledges to stop taking corporate funds? Where was his push for campaign finance reform? Though he was happy to get support from someone who IS pushing for such reform, he's not cutting back on his fundraising. From the L.A. Times:
    OAKLAND — Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger, who has collected more than $76 million in contributions since running in the recall election two years ago, campaigned Monday with U.S. Sen. John McCain, who once called former Gov. Gray Davis' push to raise $26 million "disgraceful."
    --snip--
    At a news conference at the Burbank Airport Hilton, the senator was questioned about Schwarzenegger's fundraising record. A reporter reminded him of his comments in 2001, which had been circulated Monday by a Democratic operative, and asked why he had been "silent" about the Republican governor. "I haven't been silent," McCain shot back. McCain said Schwarzenegger must fight unions that can spend tens of millions of dollars and work within that system — as Davis did, he said — by raising his own money. "I think the governor has played by the rules of the game," McCain said. "Do I like the game? No. But to tie one hand behind his back would not be appropriate." Later, McCain added that he had advised Schwarzenegger to pursue campaign finance reform once the special election is past. Schwarzenegger said he suggested legislation to restrict fundraising during state budget negotiations, but lawmakers rejected it because they "wanted to hold onto the status quo."
    Hmmm. I guess he needed to keep raising money to pay for the special election that only HE wanted. Funny he didn't want to add the finance reform issue to his list of initiatives...

    Re: Calif: Resounding Defeat for Arnold's Props (none / 0) (#18)
    by Patrick on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:05:53 PM EST
    Web, The LA times endorsed Prop 77. That bootlicking arnold supporting paper.

    Re: Calif: Resounding Defeat for Arnold's Props (none / 0) (#19)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:05:53 PM EST
    Yes, and the San Francisco Chronicle did too. So? You agree with EVERYTHING your paper says? In any case, it doesn't mean that particular plan was well thought out. It doesn't make the initiative system a useful way of crafting laws and policies. And it sure as hell doesn't make Ahnold a reformer. He's just as much an insider as the man he replaced. And we just collectively spent tens or hundreds of millions of dollars on a joke. I'm not exactly proud of that fact! And the fact is, we DO need reforms. They just need to come from someone with a genuine interest in fixing things and doing what's good for Californians... not this faux populism.

    Re: Calif: Resounding Defeat for Arnold's Props (none / 0) (#20)
    by Patrick on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:05:53 PM EST
    My mistake. They endorsed most if not all of the props, and they weren't the only ones...

    Re: Calif: Resounding Defeat for Arnold's Props (none / 0) (#21)
    by Patrick on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:05:53 PM EST
    Well Web, do you? I found it quite amusing that I was in agreement with those papers. What I think it shows is that people were easily swayed by the misinformation put out by the politicians and union leaders. I'm not normally a tin-foil hat kinda person, but if it looks like a duck, and quacks like a duck... Status quo is the wrong direction IMO.

    Re: Calif: Resounding Defeat for Arnold's Props (none / 0) (#22)
    by Patrick on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:05:53 PM EST
    Che, The teachers union spent 25 million on props 75 and 77 and only 7 million on Popr 74. Do you find that interesting?

    Re: Calif: Resounding Defeat for Arnold's Props (none / 0) (#23)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:05:53 PM EST
    What I think it shows is that people were easily swayed by the misinformation put out by the politicians and union leaders.
    Yep. People are easily swayed by misinformation. And misinformation is pretty much how we ended up with Ahnold. Or there are people much like yourself who choose not to make use of the information available to them. Hey, if the tinfoil hat fits... don't stick your head in a microwave.

    Re: Calif: Resounding Defeat for Arnold's Props (none / 0) (#24)
    by Che's Lounge on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:05:53 PM EST
    Patrick, My legal defense fund is what is valuable to me As it should be. But why doesn't your employer provide it? Or you can do like I do for my other job (health practitioner with no union), buy it yourself. So effectively the cost of that insurance is more than quadrupled Don't I know it. My medical malpractice costs me $2500/yr (annual 20% increases)and that is a fraction of what most MD's pay. But it is tax deductible as a necessary expense. You may not have that option. And I know that, in your profession also, legal defense insurance is a must. But I'm getting OT. Can you link to your stats from above? I'm interested. I want unions to stay on the up and up. There are crooks all around us and I'm sure we all expect integrity from all sides.

    Re: Calif: Resounding Defeat for Arnold's Props (none / 0) (#25)
    by Patrick on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:05:53 PM EST
    Che, LDF is not available to the individual at that price, I'm sure there's personal insurance out there, but that is cost prohibitive. Another good thing about unions. Here's the link to who paid what to whom.

    Re: Calif: Resounding Defeat for Arnold's Props (none / 0) (#26)
    by Patrick on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:05:53 PM EST
    And misinformation is pretty much how we ended up with Ahnold.
    Lies again, but then I didn't vote for him.

    Re: Calif: Resounding Defeat for Arnold's Props (none / 0) (#27)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:05:53 PM EST
    "Lies again"? Rather than insulting my integrity, I'd like you to provide citations refuting what I said and proving they aren't true. And refute this (CNN, late 2003):
    For example, candidate Schwarzenegger pledged never to target education when cutting spending to balance the budget. But he conceded this week he might have to suspend a key school funding guarantee. During the campaign, Schwarzenegger said Gov. Gray Davis lagged in enrolling children in a state insurance plan; as governor, Schwarzenegger now proposes to limit enrollment in the program, which could put tens of thousands of poor children on a waiting list for health insurance. Meanwhile, his key campaign pledge for an outside audit of the state's books failed to find the large-scale waste or fraud that he suggested was there. Schwarzenegger insists the audit is a continuing, and more details from the analysis will emerge. The governor has also abandoned a pledge to hire private investigators to examine campaign allegations that he groped women over several years, saying the probe would only be used as political fodder. Schwarzenegger is also raising millions from powerful Capitol forces, the same as any conventional politician, after announcing, "I don't need to take money from anybody" during his August 6 announcement for governor on "The Tonight Show With Jay Leno." He has four fund-raisers scheduled in December.
    So in short, Ahnold said he was going to do one thing, and time after time, he did something quite the opposite. Fact. But like I said, maybe you choose to ignore the information available to you. Insulting people you can't otherwise debate with rationally is so much more satisfying, I guess! (And I shudder to think who you did vote for if not him. Mary Carrey?)

    Re: Calif: Resounding Defeat for Arnold's Props (none / 0) (#28)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:05:53 PM EST
    It is gratifying that Diebold obviously found its (gag) longterm interest in e-voting more important than Stealing One for the Jipper. But across the state vote-fraud was committed, from my cousin who was refused a provisional ballot, to the car dealership where I was forced to vote that had no parking, to Schwarzenegger himself being allowed to vote TWO ballots. All LA county citizens need to know that County Registrar of Voters Connie "Diebold" McCormack broke the law last night, by refusing to allow the public to view the counting process. Here's the law she broke:
    Article 2. Automated Count in a Central Location Election Code 15204. All proceedings at the central counting place, or counting places, if applicable, shall be open to the view of the public...
    • We must initiate an effort to have her REMOVED FROM OFFICE. On 21 Nov 05 Diebold will be in Sacto for hearing on their new voting equipment. Activists and ordinary citizens are strongly encouraged to write their representatives, appear at the hearing, and in other ways make their view known: • that Diebold MUST be stripped of all e-voting contracts in California for its continued illegal acts, and California MUST shift e-voting to OPEN SOURCE SOFTWARE, while raising the audit percentage to 5% (from 1%), as is appropriate to this new technology. Don't sit on your laurels, folks. An election that should never have happened has gone down to ignominy. But the important elections still loom, and California is NOT receiving legal elections, even with the return of our papertrail, feloniously taken by Diebold and officials like McCormack.

    Re: Calif: Resounding Defeat for Arnold's Props (none / 0) (#29)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:05:53 PM EST
    Also, California WILL be recalling Gov. Vote-Fraud in JULY (8 months from now). The signature collection WILL be going on in December and early January. We WILL qualify the recall for the July 06 ballot (an already scheduled election). Californians WILL have a papertrail for that election. And the Shame of 2003 WILL be reversed. Adiós, AS(s).

    Re: Calif: Resounding Defeat for Arnold's Props (none / 0) (#30)
    by Patrick on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:05:53 PM EST
    Or there are people much like yourself who choose not to make use of the information available to them. I believe it is people like you, who swallowed the propaganda hook, line and sinker to be the ones who did not make use of information available. When you start with insults, expect them back, at least from me. Now, where in your article is there a lie? I don't need to refute it, it already does the job. All politicians make promises that are hard if not impossible to keep. To blame arnold for the lack of the california legislature's ablility to reach a balanced budget is somewhat misstating the process. Increasing the education budget 3 billion instead of 6 billion is not making cuts. And fundraising, well show me a politician that doesn't and then we'll talk about that issue. Besides this isn't about the recall election it's about this election, and even if arnold is the worst most lying governer ever, that is no reason to vote against a good idea. Being locked into political ideology is what got us here in the first place. Judging by your Mary Carrey comment it sounds like you feel he (arnold)was the only qualified candidate. I shudder too.

    Re: Calif: Resounding Defeat for Arnold's Props (none / 0) (#31)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:05:53 PM EST
    Sigh. Folks, it looks like Patrick can't read so good (oh, and by the way, it's "ability" not "ablility" and "governor" not "governer"), so I'm gonna spell it out. Ahnold promised he would fund education at a certain level. He broke that promise. He promised he'd clean house. He raised even more money than Davis, and made decisions that were favorable to contributors - a conflict of interest, and giving the appearance of corruption. He promised he'd work with everybody, and then he attacked Democrats, and teachers, and healthcare workers. Also, he promised he'd investigate those harrassment allegations against him. What happened to that? Sure, politicians make promises they can't keep. But the entire point of his campaign was supposed to be that he'd be different. He's not. Sure, bad people come up with good ideas. But the redistricting plan wasn't well designed. This is not the last word on redistricting ever, and there's another election next year. If someone comes up with a better plan, put it on the ballot. Better yet, the governor could do what he promised and stop all the grandstanding. By the way, I didn't call you names, or accuse YOU of lying. But you sure haven't said anything to make me think you get your information from anywhere but right-wing radio. I asked for sources of your information. Why don't you go ahead and provide them? I'm sure it will be quite enlightening and better than all this sturm und drang. If you expect people to just mindlessly agree with you, you're on the wrong website.

    Re: Calif: Resounding Defeat for Arnold's Props (none / 0) (#32)
    by Patrick on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:05:53 PM EST
    Arnold bad = props bad, well there you have it folks, all you ever need to know about elections from Webmacher. And he can spell check for you too. If your looking for election information in California, you can start here, I'm sure they'll update it for the next one. I've already linked to the editorials, what else do you want? There's plenty out there. Where did you get your info? The back of crackerjack box, the inside cover of a mary carrey movie? Or did you just sit and take in the ads and decide based on those? You see, I don't care if arnold is a good or bad govner, because that wasn't one of the issues of this election and as much as you'd like to make it that, it isn't. I'll decide who gets my vote when I see the competition and what they bring to the table.

    Re: Calif: Resounding Defeat for Arnold's Props (none / 0) (#33)
    by Sailor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:05:53 PM EST
    Patrick, "Arnold bad = props bad" may have been the case. Good thing he wasn't being recalled. I know webmacher led off with an insult, but his points after that were cogent. You didn't have to respond in kind to his opening pgraph. You have salient points on this issue and facts should speak for themselves. (yeah, I know, I also break that rule;-) et al; step away from the insult, put it down and step away from the insult.-) IRT redistricting; "Requires panel of three retired judges, selected by legislative leaders." I don't see that as fair. I don't think the current system is fair either, in any state. It would be fairly simple to draw (every 10 years,as the US Constitution says) congressional districts by computer. This process shouldn't be political, but apolitical. Politically appointed judges isn't going to change that.

    Re: Calif: Resounding Defeat for Arnold's Props (none / 0) (#34)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:05:53 PM EST
    Posted by Patrick: "Arnold bad = props bad," Arnold takes $67 MILLION in special interest money. Arnold's props = bad. That's why we pay a salary. So the governor doesn't have to moonlight for special interests. The redictricting was MAINLY for real estate developers, not for politics per se. NINE MILLION DOLLARS from them. But don't cry for them -- their BOUGHT boy will still put out for them, for eight more long months.

    Re: Calif: Resounding Defeat for Arnold's Props (none / 0) (#35)
    by Che's Lounge on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:05:53 PM EST
    Patrick, I'm not finding CTA on the donor lists for 75 and 77. Are they using another name as part of a coalition. Perusing the link, it is astounding to see the tens of millions accumulated by some groups. One pro 77 group raised like 35 mill to support just one prop.

    Re: Calif: Resounding Defeat for Arnold's Props (none / 0) (#36)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:05:58 PM EST
    This just showed up on our CEPN (California Election Protection Network) list: A grassroots recall campaign to oust Arnold Schwarzenegger from office by next July is underway. Thousands of people are eagerly signing up as volunteers. (It doesn't look like paid collectors will be needed. This is truly grassroots outrage at election fraud and authoritarian would-be overlords). For more information, and to volunteer or contribute to this campaign, go to: Recall Save Cal Article from a newspaper in Sacramento on the Jully 2006 Recall campaign

    Calif: Resounding Defeat for Arnold's Props | 36 comments (36 topical)