1. I have no idea WHY the governor would publish in a British newspaper.
2. SMOGII, enacted by Davis and his cronies in the legislature is designed, actually, to get older vehicles OFF the road, at any rate.
3. While there is a mass migration out of CA; population in CA, nonetheless has been INCREASING. That one is not hard to figure out. Which also means those newly entering to reside in CA may be in the market for purchasing older cars which will then be caught via SMOGII leviathon.
4. With the population increase, it is more than logical to assume that more energy is being used for sustainability which then, of course, radiates a heat "plus". Calling it global warming is just using PC coinage.
5. With polls showing the Governor's ratings going down, Dems are posing WHOM for the next Governor? I'm curious as to what exactly Governor Arnold is "leaving" to the next Democrat Governor to deal with.
I've known of Tom for many years -- he's one of the best! However, Arnold won.
I'll be brave here: Why is it that some FRpers are coming across like Lib-Losers in need of Pest Therapy? Go on, throw your mud at me. Tom didn't win the office as much as many of we wished. Now, where do we all go from here?
Europe is very interested in writings about so-called "global warming" and why? They too are being heavily hit by primarily illegal immigration and it is costing these countries mega bucks at every bureacratic level imaginable.
To my eye, then, the arguments rests at the level of halting illegal immigration and the need to track the terrorist network.
Lastly, do any of you think Tom McClintock will plan another run for Governor soon?
The source of that population increase is demographically not as strong economically, and you know it.
4. With the population increase, it is more than logical to assume that more energy is being used for sustainability which then, of course, radiates a heat "plus". Calling it global warming is just using PC coinage.
Best you learn more about the NRDC natural gas scam in California.
Dems are posing WHOM for the next Governor?
Lockyer and Angelides are the two most likely.
Why is it that some FRpers are coming across like Lib-Losers in need of Pest Therapy? Go on, throw your mud at me.
Because Bill Simon would be governor today if the GOP "moderates" in control of the party's money (particularly Gerry Parsky) had not deliberately thrown that election. Because Tom McClintock would be Controller if the GOP "moderates" had given him a dime's worth of support and organization. Because Tom McClintock would have won the recall had the GOP "moderates" WHO HAD FOUGHT THE RECALL had not decided to highjack that effort with their crooked put-up Arnold who will eventually bring discredit to the GOP because of his policies (just as Wilson did). It was dishonest and virtiolic posters like FareOpinion who led that effort here, relying primarily upon the the bogus claim that Arnold was a fiscal conservative.
Is that enough for you?
Now, where do we all go from here?
Educate the fools who fell for the fear campaign and bought a pig in a poke so that something like this "only moderates can win in California" crap isn't attempted again. That's what you see here.
Europe is very interested in writings about so-called "global warming" and why?
Europe is a democratic socialist system in which the politically dominant; i.e., those with the money to finance politicians, have control of the means of production. In Europe, the politically dominant are bankers. The "global warming" scam is designed for international bankers to cash in on carbon taxes. They'll use the taxes to hamper production in the industrialized world and invest in the corrupt developing world. They believe that the tax advantages they'll enjoy will insure a fat return.
Lastly, do any of you think Tom McClintock will plan another run for Governor soon?
The GOP leadership will do everything in its power to stop that. That's why the fight here between conservatives and CAGOP surrogates. Don't look for it to end soon.
I am no expert on global warming, but see enough conflicting "scientific" information to make me a skeptic. I also see many politicians and activist organizations using questionable "science" to impose unwarranted and burdensome laws and regulation on business and society, driving us to more socialism (while at the same time enriching themselves from businesses benefiting from implementation of same regulations). If those promoting this type of wrong-minded action have an (R) by their name, they can only be held accountable by other (R)s.
Our two party system provides a system of checks and balances. When one sways too far left or right, the other side will reel them in. Instead of judging an action based on the letter by one's name, I try to look only at the action. If a politician proposes a tax increase, does it matter whether they have an (R) or (D) by their name? If a politician promotes use of emminent domain, violating an individuals right to private property, does it matter whether they have an (R) or (D) by their name?
You seem to want to explain the phenomena happening in the party on 'sore losers.' You are way off base here, IMO. It has to do with keeping a set of checks and balances in place. The current administration is promoting actions that swing too far to the left and greatly deviate from a platform of smaller government, freedom, etc. If (R)s don't oppose this, who will?
When the various actions taken by this governor are highlighted on these threads, instead of acknowledging the fact that they are taking us in the wrong direction, many party faithfuls attempt to justify these actions by bringing up Bustamante, McClintock, etc. The election is over, done, kaput. Those comments are tiresome, and despite being proven wrong with links, analysis, etc., continue to be posted here time and time again. They are successful in doing one thing: taking the focus off the real issue, that we have an administration that is proposing leftist actions with absolutely no opposition.
Gray Davis was viciously attacked (rightfully so) for proposing to use debt to fund the State's operating expenses ($8 Billion in bonds). Yet party faithfuls fully supported an action far worse than this when proposed by the current administration ($15 Billion in bonds). I see post after post talking about how we need to support the reforms proposed by Arnold on the upcoming ballot. Yet, if you read some of those reforms, you find that they do not improve the things they are touted to be (e.g. the 'Spending Cap' measure authorizes yet more borrowing--to the tune of about $10 Billion).
Many people on these threads seem to think principles no longer matter, dismissing them by calling people "idealogues." Should we abandon all of our ideals, as long as there is an (R) in office? Ideals are the thing that distinguish (D)s from (R)s. Both have ideals, they are just very different. I will continue to oppose things that further the socialist ideals of the (D)s. Those things include many of the actions proposed by this (R) governor. Taxpayer subsidized 'after school programs', taxpayer subsidized solar roofs, taxpayer subsidized hydrogen highways, taxpayer subsidized stem-cell research, socialistic conservancies for economic development, continued high spending on social programs, etc. etc. etc.
The latest action taken by Arnold, standing with Kofi Annan, Al Gore, Gavin Newsom, et al at World Environment Day, declaring war on Global Warming is just another example of the leftist ideals being promoted by an (R) administration. Writing an editorial for a foreign publication, promoting this leftist dribble, is even more outrageous.
If it had been Gray Davis doing this, instead of Arnold, what would be the reaction here at FR? I think you know the answer. I need to steal from NormsRevenge tagline here:
"To remain silent when they should protest makes cowards of men." -- THOMAS JEFFERSON