The American Spectator : Benedict Arnold

Print Email

Just over five years ago, Arnold Schwarzenegger swept into power in California, vowing to crush the "spending addicts" responsible for the state's crushing budget deficit and to thwart Sacramento Democrats who saw taxpayers as ATMs.

"The people of California have been punished enough. From the time they get up in the morning and flush the toilet, they are taxed. Then they go and get a coffee, they are taxed. They get into their car, they are taxed. They go to the gas station, they are taxed. They go for lunch and they are taxed and [it] goes on all day long, tax, tax, tax, tax, tax.…This is crazy," the Republican movie star said in August 2003 as his campaign to recall and replace Democratic Gov. Gray Davis hit high gear.

Now, however, Schwarzenegger is about to stab California's beleaguered taxpayers in the back. Not only is he poised to support Democrats' push to raise the state's sales tax, income tax and gas taxes to close a budget deficit of about $1 billion a month; he is also expected to go along with a devious legal maneuver that may allow Democrats to impose tax hikes on a simple majority vote of the Legislature, despite the California constitution's stipulation that taxes can only go up on a two-thirds vote.

Given the fervor of Schwarzenegger's anti-tax rhetoric in both his 2003 election and 2006 re-election campaigns, this turnabout is stunning. It's as if environmentalists woke up one morning to headlines that Al Gore was personally drilling for crude in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge.

What happened? The simplest answer is that in late 2005, Schwarzenegger decided he would rather try to be a popular governor than a great one who got a lot done. The shift from aggressive to accommodating came after Schwarzenegger's slate of budget, teacher tenure, redistricting and union-dues reform measures were defeated in a November 2005 special election due to a $100 million-plus union disinformation campaign.

The strategy worked, at least politically. In 2006, Schwarzenegger dropped his confrontational approach to the Democrats who control the legislature, teaming with them to win enactment of the first comprehensive anti-global-warming law enacted by any state and to persuade voters to pass $42 billion in bonds for various infrastructure projects. A humming economy yielded an unexpected $9 billion revenue surge that made budget negotiations less fractious than normal, and the governor coasted to re-election with a campaign built on the audacious premise that Schwarzenegger had established a new, "post-partisan" template for American politics.

Most of the state and national media swallowed the myth whole, ignoring the fact that zero real progress had been made under Schwarzenegger on California's most intractable problems -- its mediocre public schools, broken prisons, vast unfunded liabilities for benefits for retired public employees and antiquated water system.

This myth may persist in the minds of David Broder and George Stephanopoulos. But in Sacramento, at least, Schwarzenegger's claim to have pioneered a new form of successful governance is now seen as an utter joke. Instead, even Democrats say his recent stewardship seems like a tired reprise of the final years of Gray Davis, his disgraced predecessor. Just like Davis, Schwarzenegger has shunned Republican budget proposals in favor of plans that preserve the state's discredited status quo. (It was only in September that the governor finally accepted that spending actually must decrease instead of increase at a slower pace.) Instead of targeting majority Democrats beholden to public employee unions as Sacramento's biggest problem, Schwarzenegger joined the media in depicting minority Republicans as the key villains for refusing to raise taxes -- the same as Davis.

Now that a deep recession has struck the Golden State, gimmicks and accounting tricks can no longer be used to disguise the deficit that has been building over the past eight years -- and Schwarzenegger is prepared to go to an extreme that even Davis didn't dare consider.

Instead of embracing a severe-but-workable GOP budget plan that avoids new taxes, the governor is working almost exclusively with Democrats -- and they have dreamed up an extraordinary end run around the two-thirds tax hike requirement. Under their reading of the law, revenue-neutral measures can be adopted on a simple majority vote. So they adopted a bill that sharply raises sales, income and gas taxes while eliminating the fee drivers must play each year to register their cars. Democrats then reinstated the car fee to its old amount, relying on legal precedents that classified the levy as a fee, which can be raised on a simple majority vote.

Schwarzenegger rejected the bill -- but only because Democrats refused to make some concessions on unrelated issues, not because of outrage over an open assault on the clear intent of the state constitution.

In coming days, he's likely to gain these concessions and sign the bill, giving California by far the highest taxes of any state. Not only that, he will have made it much easier for far more tax hikes to be imposed in the future by going along with the gutting of the chief anti-tax provision of the California constitution.

It's hard to believe this is happening. Arnold Schwarzenegger was supposed to defend taxpayers. Instead, he's ended up being the tax collector for the public employee union state. Betrayals don't get much more extreme than this.

Letter to the Editor

topics:
Taxes, California

Melvin| 1.6.09 @ 7:25AM

To quote a phrase from the movie, "Philadelphia," starring Tom Hanks. "What do you call 10 thousand lawyers at the bottom of the sea?".. A good start.

Deborah| 1.6.09 @ 7:32AM

What happens to Republican governors (and presidents) in their second term? Do they just get tired of fighting the fight? Or is Arnold just getting too much grief from his Kennedy wife? California is going down the tubes as quickly as Michigan. How embarrassing for you, Arnold.

NJSoldier| 1.6.09 @ 7:42AM

Yet one more Rino to be hunted and bagged in the next primary season.

St. Thor| 1.6.09 @ 7:53AM

Fortunately for the U.S. the founders wisely forbid the election of fascists from Austria as President.

frankg| 1.6.09 @ 8:18AM

Just a hint of things to come in the national circus of government as financial circumstances tighten and prevent the usual clown acts that got the budget through congress.

George| 1.6.09 @ 8:18AM

What can you expect from a person who calls Ted "The Lyin' of the Senate" uncle?

He wants us to amend the U.S. Constitution so he can become President? After 4 years of Obamao, it might actually look like an attractive option.

Bob| 1.6.09 @ 8:30AM

When are you guys going to realize that you can't be an ultra right wing, social conservative ideologue and win in California or New York? Republicans now only hold the less affluent South. There isn't even a Republican congressman anymore from New England and the New England senators are all centrists. You all sound like a bunch of extremists calling for jihad rather than realists who want to build a center-right party.

Ryan| 1.6.09 @ 8:38AM

That would be nice if Ahnuld was doing something center-right. Working with the lefties in CA is NOT a center right action.

And, keep in mind, Reagan was governor there, and when Arnold won, there was a substantial portion of the population who ALSO voted for the conservative.

Center-right coalitions don't have to give up the ideals of lower taxes and less spending in government, as Arnold has done.

Bob| 1.6.09 @ 8:49AM

Ryan, I agree with you except that Reagan could not have been elected in the California of today. Hispanics and blacks have grown dramatically in California in the past 30 years and they are, by far, Democrats. In addition, the dot com boom changed Northern California and, if you can believe it, has become even more liberal.

Jason| 1.6.09 @ 8:53AM

Why have fiscal restraint when you can get the Federal Government to print money for you?
http://www.rightklik.net

NJSoldier| 1.6.09 @ 9:05AM

Bob: "the less affluent South"? Please move your calendar forward by a century. Businesses, jobs, retirees, and normal people are fleeing the places you named to the “less affluent South” to escape the policies of New England “centrists.”

saleboter| 1.6.09 @ 9:06AM

Will the last taxpayer leaving California please turn out the lights.

Todd| 1.6.09 @ 9:14AM

Bob,
The reason Republicans supported Arnold initially despite his liberal social views was because he was suppose to be a fiscal conservative but that has turned out to be a joke. There is nothing center-right about what Arnold has become but we should have probably known better to support his huge movie star ego in the first place who had no track record to back up his talk.

No one in California or New York or this website is demanding ultra right wing social conservatives like you claim but want our tax dollars managed appropriately and politicians who can actually budget money without the huge deficits that both states face now that the gravy train has come to a crashing halt. New York and California are prime examples of what happens when liberals seize all political power and it is not a pretty sight. Rinos like Arnold and Bloomberg (when he was elected) have collaborated with the enemy and the results are becoming clear for everyone to see, a financial train wreck of epic proportions.

Deborah| 1.6.09 @ 9:25AM

My two libertarian brothers who actually live in California are appalled by what Arnold has become. Needless to say, they really didn't expect this.

Bob| 1.6.09 @ 9:31AM

Todd, I'm with you totally on the need for fiscal conservatism. However, the thrust of the people that post on this site equate fiscal conservatism with social conservatism and call everyone else "RINO's".

But, Todd, I ask you how we can get fiscal conservatism to work. It didn't work under Reagan as the debt grew dramatically when we cut taxes but raised spending. It didn't work under either Bush for the same reason. So the issue is not the need for fiscal conservatism, but how to make it work.

I would claim that history has proven the low tax theory wrong. That theory has been if you lower taxes, you will squeeze spending down. This has never worked. What I propose is the reverse -- make people pay for what they want to spend. If we lower taxes and increase spending, we don't get hurt, but our children and grandchildren get killed. So if the electorate wants the government to spend, let them pay for it. There will be a revolt when the tax gets too high and then we'll finally be able to reduce spending.

Interestingly enough, this is what is occurring in California.

Todd| 1.6.09 @ 9:37AM

I will also mention Bob that I don't believe that any of the southern States where social conservatism is predominant are going to be demanding federal bailouts like California and New York will be. You want to make them out to be the boogeyman but they are doing a much better job of running their States than the moderates and lefties in the Northeast and on the left coast. I see no evidence of social liberalism and fiscal conservatism co-existing anywhere to good effect because liberals have no interest in co-existing since nothing but complete power will satisfy them.

Todd| 1.6.09 @ 10:05AM

That is an interesting theory Bob but you have to separate the State gov and Federal gov. States can't keep overspending because they do not have the power of the Federal gov to print money or with debt instruments such as treasury bills. I know you understand that but just wanted to make that point.

As a fiscal conservative, we want lower taxes and balanced budgets but liberals always want increased taxes and they see overspending as a way to accomplish this. Lets just take a look at what Gov Patterson and Gov Arnold have done recently with asking for massive tax increases to reduce the budget. This will further hurt the economies and will just make the problems worse and the more productive people decide to go elsewhere so they can keep more of their money. Liberals don't give a damn about that because they just want more power and control and Arnold is playing right into their hands. Alot of tough talk from him at first but it turned out to be just that. He married into the Kennedy's so none of this should be too surprising.

Arnold and Bloomberg both claimed to be fiscal conservatives when they got elected and would be "pragmatic without ideology" to get things done for the best interest of the people. How did that turn out? The problem with them is because they did not have a conservative ideology, they had no political backbone to stand up to the liberal special interests that are ruining the financial well-being of the country.

So in conclusion Bob, lets point the finger of blame where it belongs instead of your repeated attempts to blame social conservatives. The problem with you is despite your claim to be pragmatic and look at the evidence, you are blinded by your ideology as anyone on this site. It is the RINOS that have damaged the Republican Party more than anyone as Arnold is doing and McCain has done.

james wilson| 1.6.09 @ 10:19AM

It is not "hard to belive this is hapening" at all.

Ammo Guy| 1.6.09 @ 10:34AM

I suppose I should care what is happening in CA and NY, but I don't. As Ed Koch once said after his defeat in the mayoral primary, "the people have spoken and now they must be punished."

Joe B| 1.6.09 @ 10:50AM

Yes, only in California can you have a $200K family gross income and still be among the working poor. After you pay auto and medical insurance premiums inflated due to law suits and uninsured illegal Mexicans, pay your taxes to fund the happy lifestyles of lesbian public school teachers, lazy firemen, ineffective police, and prison guards, and fork over your kids $110-per- school-day private school tuition so they can be spared the violence and cultural toxins in public schools now overrun by illegal Mexican's kids and lesbian teachers, you're left with enough money to go see a new feature film maybe once a month. And the movie is likely to turn your stomach because it's a silly pablum sermon about how great multiculturalism is.

Deborah| 1.6.09 @ 11:05AM

Hey Ammo Guy -- I'm right there with you except that those two states (and Ohio) are asking for bailouts from the Federal government. That means you and me and the rest of the country will have to pay for liberal policies throughout the country if President O goes along with bailout nation. Read it in the Washington Post here:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/12/26/AR2008122601837.html

Joe B| 1.6.09 @ 11:08AM

Oh, did I mention my $3000/mo mortgage and $9000/yr because middle class 1700 sq ft houses in safe areas of CA are still selling for over $750 K?

Todd| 1.6.09 @ 11:08AM

Ammo Guy,
I understand your apathy towards NY and CA but its a much bigger issue than just those two states. Unfortunately, the political stink of liberalism emanating from those states is spreading throughout the country and as a result we got Barack Hussein Obama as our President and everyone will be punished.

Chris| 1.6.09 @ 11:22AM

Who would have thought it? AH-nold has become the "girly man" of the GOP. First Bloomberg ruining NYC and now this. And these are the "moderates" who are running around trying to claim the mantle of our party? Governor Palin looks better and better everyday.

megapotamus| 1.6.09 @ 12:06PM

The problem is plain. Arnold and numberless other officials from both parties, ran and governed not to bring a better executive to the office but to burnish their own egos. I recall that with Arnold, it was argued that since he was already an international mega-star he was immune to the seduction of lowly gubernatorial glamour. Not so. The politician has powers even the mightiest star can never wield. Just look at the lunatic Streisand, unsatisfied with bottomless wealth and adulation she still must tell us all what is what. Arnold is a born politician in the worst sense; an attention hound first and foremost. All else comes second. But those who say California must now face reality are right. No bailouts. None. Not ever. Or we are done.

Ammo Guy| 1.6.09 @ 12:42PM

Yeah, I can see the state bailout juggernaut a'comin' and wonder who will stand up to derail it...sigh. Do you realize that there are only 3 Republicans left amongst the 29 NY House members? And, living in Northern Virginia I am witness to what happens when a socialist, one-party state (read: Maryland) implodes - the idiot liberals flee the high taxes and crime to come live with me...and continue to vote like they did in the "paradise" they just left. So, instead of the situation I enjoyed when I moved here - 2 GOP Senators, a GOP Gov and a solid guy GOP Rep in Tom Davis - I now have nothing but libs. I know of what you speak.

Deborah| 1.6.09 @ 1:08PM

Yeah, I "feel your pain" as a famous Democrat once said. I lived in NC for years before ending up in GA, and the libs have invaded that state -- screwing it over bigtime. GA isn't there yet, but many folks are escaping leftism in their former states and heading to the warmer (and stabler gov't) climates only to bring their wacko ideas with them. Not sure what the answer is -- perhaps we need a fence? :)

Bob| 1.6.09 @ 2:31PM

Todd, libertarian leaning Republicans are, by and large, fiscal conservatives and social moderates. Many of us voted for Obama because we thought Palin was unqualified and McCain was not a good leader -- he ran a lousy campaign and couldn't manage his way out of a wet paper bag. We are the swing votes for the Republican party. We include people like Colin Powell and many of the conservative "intellectuals". We do have a bias against ideologues and favor pragmatists.

The southern states are in a better financial position because their economies are far different than California. California has a much higher percentage of Hispanics, has a much higher incidence of crime in the inner cities, has huge water problems, and is filled with high tech companies that create jobs primarily overseas. Trying to compare Kentucky with California doesn't make any sense.

California and New York also have problems serving medical and welfare needs. You have a number of neighborhoods with 15-20% unemployment, gang violence, and hospitals that are not allowed to turn people away. Of course, with those problems, there will be more votes for government intervention.

NJSoldier| 1.6.09 @ 2:46PM

Bob,

I'm supposed to believe that you are a fiscal conservative who voted for a first term Senator with no leadership or business experience whatsoever, who ran on the most left-wing economic promises since Huey Long - because the Republican’s Presidential candidate, a war-hero, can't lead and the VP, a Governor and former businesswoman was "unqualified?"

I can’t sugar-coat it. You are either a liar or an idiot.

Ammo Guy| 1.6.09 @ 2:47PM

Sigh, here we go again...I don't see how you can be both a "fiscal conservative" and "social moderate" because the "needs" of those who make bad decisions will always trump those who try to enstill a modicum of fiscal discipline in the budgeting process. How can the green eyeshade crowd compete with televised images of the "results" of their parsimony? Oh, look at the poor women with 6 kids from 6 different fathers who has no health care. Oh, look at the poor kid who can't get a job because the public school he attended was so underfunded. "Trying to compare Kentucky with California doesn't make any sense," so KY open your wallet and don't complain.

Todd| 1.6.09 @ 3:03PM

Colin Powell a conservative "intellectual"? You give yourself away Bob once again with that one, that is a good laugh. Powell has shown himself to be nothing more than a political opportunist and a closet liberal, he used Republicans to get himself promoted and jumped ship when he determined in was in his interest to do so. Tell me Bob being the fiscal conservative you claim to be, how is Obama representing the interest of fiscal conservatives? We have had this discussion before but your logic is inconsistent to say the least. You either have to be confused or you are misrepresenting yourself in my opinion.

Yes, those high tech companies are to blame for California's budget problems and not the incompetence and leftist ideology of their politicians, very astute of you Bob. Not to mention the Democrats have no problem with all the illegal immigrants because they see them as a source of votes for their liberal policies. I guess that is because they are pragmatic, not ideological like those who believe immigration laws should be enforced and to throw the illegals out.

D Jones| 1.6.09 @ 3:10PM

It is true that a true conservative Republican could not be elected governor today in California or New York. I would not dream of arguing that point with anyone above who has made it. But...there's no reason for the Republicans to go squishy liberal on us just to get elected. I would much rather have a Democrat governor along with a Democrat-controlled legislature that takes the blame when the whole state starts going down the toilet. Instead, we've got Arnie in there sullying the Republican brand with his left-ward "conservatism." I've called his offices and e-mail him to ask him to switch party affiliations; I've contacted the state GOP to see if he can be kicked out, but to no avail.

And...as of next Saturday, it's no longer my problem. At long last, my family and I are moving out of California, taking our tax dollars with us. We've bought a reasonable house with a manageable mortgage in East Tennessee, one of only two states that was more Republican in the last election than in 2004. No state income tax and a sales tax that will be lower than California's by the time Arnie and the Dems have their way. Our property tax there is only $160--per year! Instead of the several hundred per month that people are paying in SoCal.

I will be laughing all the way to TN!!! Go Vols!!!

Ammo Guy| 1.6.09 @ 3:30PM

Good on you D Jones and bon voyage. The ironic thing is that you are moving to a state with a Democratic Governor who is more conservative than the "Republican" Governor of the state you just left - go figure!

Gazinya| 1.6.09 @ 3:33PM

A fiscal, moral conservative and a social liberal is the same as someone saying they believe Jesus is Lord but Satan is handing out the candy and they have a powerful sweet tooth.

Mark J. Goluskin| 1.6.09 @ 3:38PM

Hey, I have been refering to Gov. Arnold as Gov. Benedict Arnold for quite a while now. The only reason he won reelection in 2006 is because his opponent, Phil Angelides, was a radical lefty in comparison. Bob, you are not worth responding to with your trollish comments. But, I will respond to D. Jones. I disagree about a conservative not being able to be elected in California. If that conservative can make the case in an articulate manner and not back down when the Dinosaur, Drive-By, Mainstream, Obama-Worshiping Media comes at him or her, that candidate can win. I have advocated that former GOP candidate Bill Simon give it another shot. He has ran before. Is a solid conservative. Business experiance. And, if he clears the field early, then he can concentrate on raising money and profile. We need a real conservative here in Cali and I hope that Bill Simon answers the call. BTW, I REGRET that I voted for Gov. Benedict Arnold not once, but twice. UGH!

Mike| 1.6.09 @ 3:47PM

The dirty little secret that no one wants to discuss is the fact that the illegal immigrants are costing our state (California) billions of dollars. If California would focus on taking care of it's citizens there would be no need to further rip of the taxpayer!!

Bob| 1.6.09 @ 5:30PM

Ammo/Gazinya -- your belief about limited government and fiscal conservatism not being consistent with "socially liberal views" is hogwash. This is the definition of a Libertarian who believes in smaller government than either of you. In fact, I would claim you can't believe in limited government and also be a social conservative since you would want the government to enact your social conservative policies on the rest of us. That is certainly NOT limited government. Furthermore, to believe that your morals are any greater than mine, or even an atheist, is the height of hypocrisy.

Ammo Guy| 1.6.09 @ 5:38PM

So, I infer from your comments that a good way to save a lot of taxpayer money would be to stop funding AIDS research since that is largely the result of the choices that some people make, but sometimes it's hard for me to see your point from my perch on the lofty heights of hypocrisy.

ruth| 1.6.09 @ 6:06PM

NJ Soldier, you are right on both counts; Bob is both an idiot and a liar.

ruth| 1.6.09 @ 6:12PM

If countless strangers just walked into your house and decided to live there without your permission, you would go broke. Resources are finite, immigration should be too.

Thon| 1.6.09 @ 6:15PM

Bob, if this "Todd, libertarian leaning Republicans are, by and large, fiscal conservatives and social moderates. Many of us voted for Obama because we thought Palin was unqualified and McCain was not a good leader -- he ran a lousy campaign and couldn't manage his way out of a wet paper bag." is how you think, I'm glad you weren't around when Hitler was running for office. He was the most qualified by your standards. You just have to over look Obama's voting record and stated views to see the greater evil here.

Louis Jenkins| 1.6.09 @ 6:34PM

Dear Ammo Guy and D Jones:

A lot of dissatisfied liberals are moving south to make it in their own image. Don't know why, other than they must be the new pioneers, cutting a swath into the conservative wilderness and making it habitable for themselves. Next, they'll be selling typhoid contaminated blankets to us ignorant conservative hayseed-hicks. As we say in the South, "Happiness is a car with Ohio plates towing a U-Haul trailer north on I-77."

A good number of people I know are threatening, looking, and have moved to eastern Tenn. Seems its attractive for the very reasons you've named. A retired military friend has moved there and loves it. But, shhhhhh!! Don't give away the secret.

Good luck, I think we'll need in the coming months.

Richard Rider| 1.6.09 @ 6:37PM

Bob, your argument about a (fiscal) conservative not being electable in CA doesn't hold water. Arnold ran and RE-ran on a fiscally conservative platform. He won easily.

It was AFTER his second election (and last, due to term limits) that Arnold became a full-blown Benedict.

In his final four years, he is in a position to be more independent than when he was seeking votes from a largely Democrat electorate. So why go spendthrift after Big Government voter pressure is removed?

The answer is that, above all, Arnold wants to be liked, and he wants to leave a "legacy." It's a Greek tragedy -- the edifice complex.

For instance, Arnold supported the $10 billion down payment bond for a high speed rail system that clearly will cost at least $80 billion. I suspect he hopes the train will be named after him.

Bottom line: Benedict Arnold is musclebound, but lacks a spine. Arnold wants Hollywood-like adoration, and that desire trumps what he should know is the right path -- remember, he claims to be a big fan of the late Milton Friedman. As a result, "Pinwheel" Milton is rapidly spinning in his grave.

ruth| 1.6.09 @ 6:43PM

Arnold is a steroid-saturated Hollywood actor married to a Kennedy--what did you expect? The only thing he had going for him was that he was better than Gray 'zero personality' Davis.

Michigan-Matt| 1.6.09 @ 6:55PM

"The" problem isn't with GOPers like Arnold or even Linc Chaffee or Liddy Dole or others, the problem still is the damage that solid, hard-core social conservative GOPers like Tom Delay and Duke Cunningham did to our Party, the budget, our Nation and the future. They screwed the pooch, not moderates trying to govern equitably.

Stupid soc-con litmus tests be damned. The only RINOs I'd like to see kicked to the curb and out of the Party are the social conservative loons who gave us the FMA, Terry Schiavo, the Bridge to Nowhere, the racist Immigration Impass --and then had the utter gall to sit on their hands on election day and warm the sofa for a Democrat landslide.

Honest, if one more blowhard soc-con tries to label anyone as a RINO, the soc-con should be drawn and quartered and sent back to their dark cave of Neanderthal thinking and single digit political advocacy.

Like it or not, Obama will do for the liberals and Democrats what Reagan did for the soc-cons and GOP... it's a sea change moment and the American voter moved left and stuck the soc-cons in the dung pits with Whigs, Know Nothings and Free Soilers.

Arnold a RINO? Give it a rest. The first order in politics is you have to win office... and that gives him more standing than all the RINO-labeling soc-cons. God save the Party from these idiots and dolts. The goal is to win office and govern, not collect merit points for purity scores on litmus tests. If you want to do the latter, find Ron Paul or Grover Norquist and kiss some hindquarter.

Otherwise, get out of the way, go back to the pews and quit your whining about RINOs.

David Little| 1.6.09 @ 7:12PM

And just think. Arnold did an intro to Milton Friedman's TV show "Free To Choose". I'm sure Milton and Rose are, well, disappointed in their once-protege.

Jim| 1.6.09 @ 7:51PM

Michigan-Matt, you are just as cluelessy as Bob.
Just admit you are a liberal and be done with it.

ruth| 1.6.09 @ 8:06PM

Mich.Matt-go screw yourself, you're the liberal/RINO pooch.

ruth| 1.6.09 @ 8:13PM

MMatt, you're clueless and stupid. RINOs don't win; didn't the election disaster of your RINO candidate McCain prove anything to you? I honor McCain as a patriot during the Vietnam War, but I believe he has sold us out as a politician.

John Diehl| 1.6.09 @ 9:42PM

Schwarzenegger was elected because he was supposed to be a fiscal conservative is because He said he was. This like Clinton saying that he never inhaled. The only truth of the whole business, is that the public swallowed

Osamas Pajamas| 1.6.09 @ 10:20PM

When "the state" in classical political terms becomes all things to all people, it will own all things and all people. And this ain't rocket science, lads.

godblessusa| 1.6.09 @ 10:28PM

As a political independent and proud, lifelong Californian, I find these comments instructive. A clear majority of Americans knows that our economic challenges are not, at root, the fault of blacks and Mexicans (since all brown-skinned people are Mexican, evidently.) That so many posters here apparently believe otherwise is very telling. The GOP seems determined to become a southern party, uncompetitive in most of the country. Forget CA. and N.Y. Consider the margin of victory for Obama in states as diverse as MN., N.M., WA., CO., NV. or IA. Double-digits or close to it. Or the closeness in emerging swing-states like GA. (black people!) or MT. (not so many black people.) Those GOP'ers succeeding on the state level - the Arnolds and Charlie Crists of the world - seemingly engender more hatred from the base than Ted Kennedy, who at least is seen as an honest enemy rather than a traitorous ally. Even solid social-righties like Mitch Daniels and Tim Pawlenty have had to make difficult fiscal decisions when governing realities collide with idealogical litmus-tests. Conservatives want it to be 1980 forever.

Why?

ruth| 1.6.09 @ 11:19PM

Shut up, GBA. You're just another stupid liberal freak from California bleating and braying about racism that doesn't exist. No one blamed 'the brown people' for our economic problems, I blame you white suck up liberal fools for California's bankruptcy. It's your party that won't seat the black senate appointee. Now that's racism.

Todd| 1.6.09 @ 11:51PM

GBA,
The reason California is going down the drain is because there are too many dumb white liberals like you in the State. I believe the only one blaming California's problems on Hispanics and blacks is Bob though you have to be blind or stupid to not see the massive problems that illegal immigration has caused. Apparently you think Arnold is a success story so you really are a 1st class moron.

ruth| 1.7.09 @ 12:02AM

Todd, you can't blame Illinois' political stink, Obama, on Cali or NY. He's a homegrown product.

godblessusa| 1.7.09 @ 12:11AM

Ruth & Todd-

Shut up? Moron? Freak? Stupid? Dumb? You're name-calling demonstrates, with crystal clarity, that in the battle of ideas that is democracy, the "conservatives" are currently unarmed.

ruth| 1.7.09 @ 12:32AM

Whatever, GBU, but it's crystal clear that you're still a moron and a freak , and you are still stupid and dumb. You're probably a big time doper too.

Roy| 1.7.09 @ 1:16AM

That California is a liberal joke is clear. I used to live there right up until the recall election that put Arnold in office. I was going to vote against it because I thought Californians deserved what they had voted for in Grayout Davis. He hadn't committed any crimes, he had just been the liberal incompetent they had reelected. In the end I voted for it because Bill Clinton came on the radio declaring that you should vote against it as an act of brave, bold defiance of the evil Republicans, like the one he had done with Monica. I thought in that case I'm definitely for the recall. So it passed, but I didn't really think Californians had gotten any smarter and I was right. They will pass conservative referenda but go on electing the same old Democrats to implement them and of course it won't happen.

LA is bankrupt too and wanting a bailout from the state. One fascinating thing about that is that some genius in LA thought it would be neat to impose a 1% tax on the gross receipts of a business. At least, that is what my boss told me when he explained why our office was being moved out of LA. I'm pretty sure we weren't the only ones.

Illegal immigration doesn't help, but it is mostly, as I see it, a symptom of the relentless self-indulgence of natives. Illegal immigrants did not, for instance, decree that hospitals had to have a maximum of four patients per nurse. This of course instantly led to a "nursing shortage"(amazing how basic economics works). So, to lure nurses to the state they pay megabucks for "travel nurses" who accept temporary assignments, including housing in some of the most expensive neighborhoods in the country. Responsible adults would instantly scrap that system after seeing those results, but Californians do not belong in that category. Californians are people who see billboards saying "she heals, he wheels and deals" with a picture of a nurse and Arnold, and turn around and vote against referenda to make any reduction at all in the ludicrous amounts spent on government employees. Californians are people who cannot tell the difference between reducing smog and ludicrously expensive blather about "global warming", one reason why gas costs 30-60 cents more per gallon in LA than it does anywhere else in the country. Californians are people who threw four billion dollars they did not have at "stem cell research"(gotta stick it to those "social conservatives", ya know - well worth four billion dollars of other people's money to do that). Californians elected representatives who thought it would be neat to say that any individual employee has a private cause of action for any pipsqueak violation of any regulation, meaning that if some address is printed wrong on a pay stub, then some guy who has figured out that lawsuits are more profitable than work can sue his employer for megabucks. Californians created the situation where as my dad put it, every business that operates in California has or is working on a plan to reduce employment in California.

If it wasn't for the sun, it would have emptied out a long time ago. This little maneuver by the Democrats sounds like it should give people another push.

I have no doubt Obama will throw more of other people's money at them. But it could not be deserved less.

Vinnster| 1.7.09 @ 6:16AM

Anonymous quote that California proves and America will prove in the Obama Administration:
"A democracy will continue to exist up until the time that voters discover they can vote themselves generous gifts from the public treasury"

Dan Schwartz in NJ| 1.7.09 @ 8:17AM

"Arnold Schwarzenegger was supposed to defend taxpayers. Instead, he's ended up being the tax collector for the public employee union state."

Welcome to New Jersey: Last year, we won the race to the bottom in taxation, surpassing Connecticut and New York.

JamesJ| 1.7.09 @ 9:12AM

I live in So. MD. Housing prices all around our neighborhood have plummetted, yet Gov Martin O'Money just increased the taxable value of my house by $9,000.

Todd| 1.7.09 @ 11:34AM

GBA,
Sorry I offended your delicate sensibilities but looking at what has happened to California under Arnold's leadership and to refer to him as being "successful" is like saying the Titanic's voyage was a success. If that is what you think, you are a moron no doubt about it. Lets not put all the blame on Arnold for California but on the people like you that support the liberal agenda that is bankrupting the State and now you losers are begging to be bailed out by taxpayers from other states. You people are pathetic

Brian X.| 1.7.09 @ 6:16PM

Are there good webpages that clearly display how much money comes from what source and where it goes? Almost no voters remember the $? billion First Five, $6 billion Stem Cell, and $19.5 billion Coast Train projects, or where their taxes come from.

Chip's articles are always great. It is frightening how well details of spending growth are shielded by sfgate, sacbee, and latimes.

Brian X.| 1.7.09 @ 6:29PM

Michigan-Matt is right. The goofball Republicans who only want to talk about creationism, gays, and abortion, while running their own pork spending rackets have destroyed the California Republican party. Throw in all that "RINO" garbage. Now we have a situation that is ruining California itself even more.

Matt Damon's remarks will echo for years, "Do these people really believe people walked with dinosaurs five thousand years ago?" Even if you do think that, shut up about it! Throw in "Terri Schiavo", and these Republicans need to just give up.

Er, Chris's articles are great too.

Roy| 1.7.09 @ 6:36PM

Wow, I'd like to see a particle of a smidgen of a sliver of evidence that any "creationist", in any way, under any circumstances, anywhere, ever, has had anything whatsoever to do with the disaster that is California government.

Some people aren't looking for a solution, they are looking for a scapegoat.

And no, I don't believe that dinosaurs walked on the earth five thousand years ago. What I do believe is that Matt Damon doesn't know anything worth saying about it, and if you gave me a choice of somebody who believed that or Matt Damon, the speed with which I would pick the "creationist" would be truly astounding.

stmichrick| 1.7.09 @ 9:53PM

It is sad that Arnold turned out to be just another celebrity seeking mass approval. The guy seemed to appreciate America from an immigrants experience and has the ability to be an effective communicator.

Kat| 1.7.09 @ 9:53PM

I always look to Matt Damon when I want spiritual mysteries explained to me. Matt is my guru.

Welcome to the one world order| 1.7.09 @ 11:17PM

One more bankrupt state, Wall Street Banks, where is the money gone? it's gone on building the underground city.

Safe locations for, American political elite. How have they planned to get rid of the waste of DNA, will it be gassing poison the air they breath, after a time pick up the bodies, I wonder what it will be.

Henry Kissenger said the worlds population is the most dangerious thing facing the world.

Israel killing thousands of people in Gaza, is only carring out the requirements of the One World Order. The economy is not the issue, its population control stupid.

SaraforAmerica| 1.8.09 @ 9:35AM

I foresee the end of free commenting in the near future. It degrades so quickly...liberals hang around conservative sites ready to consume and defecate. It's much easier than having to go through the effort of thinking up something new and constructive on one of their "own" websites.

Bottom Line: Can we stop the juggernaut of deficit spending? Liberals demand it, conservatives abhor it....but it's far easier to be a taker than a giver. Again, I refer you to liberals hanging around conservative message boards. Takers, all.

Marc Jeric| 1.8.09 @ 12:12PM

There used to be a law prohibiting formation of government employees unions - if I remember right. Industrial unions have already destroyed many industries - steel, automobile, textile, electronics, appliances, to mention a few. And now the teacher unions have destroyed education, by producing now already the third generation of illiterate nincompoops ful of self-esteem who elected Abu Hussein, commie agitator from corrupt Chicago via Kenya as our president. Other government employees unions have endangered state governments with their automatic pay raises, cost-of-living increases, and totally inadequate pension funds that will require punitive tax increases in the future. Not to mention their "work rules", family days off, 4-week paid vacations, 17 holidays/year, etc.

Michele San Pietro| 1.8.09 @ 5:27PM

I disagree with all this criticism about Schwarzenegger (who is definitely not a "fascist"). In my opinion, he's doing a great job in California.

bobmontgomery| 1.8.09 @ 9:27PM

Yes, and when he hosts 'global warming' conferences, he probably serves champagne.

Chris| 1.29.09 @ 3:50PM

I think this is very interesting i get info for a school proz

酒店經紀爆米花| 6.13.09 @ 2:24PM

酒店兼職
 禮服店
 酒店上班
 酒店打工
 酒店小姐
 酒店經紀
 酒店兼差
 假日打工
 台北酒店經紀
 童裝批發
 童裝批發
 童裝
 童裝
 酒店喝酒
 暑假打工
 寒假打工
 酒店
 酒店經紀人
 酒店現領

kabin| 6.15.09 @ 7:40AM

thanks...
Kabin
Konteyner