Posted on 11/16/2005 9:36:07 PM PST by SierraWasp
Not a crack at all; I'm truly disappointed.
I thought better of you than to fall for conventional whizdumb.
Here's another perspective.
The CAGOP bastardized what were non partisan issues.
Prop 73 - Should parents have the right to ...
Prop 74 - Should new teachers be evaluated ...
Prop 75 - Should public employees have the right to ...
Prop 76 - Should California guarantee mid year ...
Prop 77 - Should we trust politicians to ...
Prop 78 - Should we redistribute taxpayer wealth ...
Prop 79 - Should we redistribute corporate wealth ...
Prop 80 - Should government regulate ...
After the CAGOP was through these same issues morphed into:
Prop 73 - Limit abortions ...
Prop 74 - Remove union influence from public employment ...
Prop 75 - Cut off union funds ...
Prop 76 - Give a Republican Governor more ....
Prop 77 - Take away Democrat representation ...
Prop 78 - Better than Prop 79 ...
Prop 79 - Protect corporate wealth ...
Prop 80 - Free market regardless the consequence ...
Unions and other parties with a large stake in the outcome were given a target rich, partisan theater because the CAGOP couldn't help but inject their self interests into an otherwise, non partisan playing field and used their action hero to do the bulk of their heavy lifting.
The recent recall election came to fruition because, during its infancy, the CAGOP opposed it and didn't turn it into a partisan quest. Had these recent or similar initiatives been given a similar birth and quietly promoted on the basis of their intrinsic value, the campaign against them would have been just as intense but would have faced common logic as an opponent. Instead the interested parties were given a free gift, the persona of a perceived, opportunistic partisan. grasping for power through his persuasive rhetoric, back by the party of big business.
They weren't listening when Simon said it. They listened when Arnold said it and got elected. Then when the unions said Arnold was hurting the children, they stopped listening again.
They listened, and when Simon wasn't elected, they collected enough signatures to get Davis recalled (pre-Arnold). They listened when Arnold said it and elected him Governor.
When he then turned around and introduced the largest bond offering in state history ($15 billion for Prop 57 bonds) and chose to fund more programs with debt (Pension Bonds, Tribal Gaming bonds, Stem Cell bonds, Prop 76 deferrals and bonds, etc.), they realized they voted for a poser.
calcowgirl just posted some highly interesting info about the Sunnyvale company on another thread and since I met Sunne several times while I was in public life, I just wondered... Maybe Sunne was involved with Sunnyvale... I know, I'm in the twilight zone!!!
Arnold's money squandering has nothing to do with why he lost the propositions.
I'm done with being patronized by you. You're officially on my nada list.
Well, my comment was following a discussion about gubernatorial candidates (see yours at #52), not propositions.
Regardless, Arnold's money squandering is exacly why I, and others, voted against Prop 76.
Hoo boy.
Let me know when you grow up enough to do your own thinking.
Could you please link me to some major conservatives who were opposed to 76 so I can read their opinions?
Well, I'm not sure what you mean by "major conservatives." The ones I'm speaking of aren't published, so it would be impossible to give you a link to read their opinions. They are just ordinary folks (and voters) who took the time to read the initiative instead of listening to the propaganda from both sides. If you followed the election threads, you would have seen the discussion amongst several freepers here.
Give Cinnimon Girl the Reason Foundation article on 76 or the one from Pete Wilson's finance director, then tell her to STHU.
Such a Deal, Californians have a history of buying ballot measures that are deceptively written and advertised
By Ted Balaker
I haven't found Craig Brown's piece (Pete Wilson's Finance Director), who actually made a commercial against Prop. 76, calling it an unconstitutional power grab. While I didn't consider the mid-year reductions to be unconstitutional, I would agree that the Big 5 negotiation process clearly is.
Here it is:
Other view: No on Prop. 76
Sac Bee ^ | 10/21/05 | Craig Brown
Posted on 10/21/2005 9:48:07 AM PDT by NormsRevenge
I must have missed that opinion piece by Craig Brown. Thanks. I did, however, see support for 76 by all the well known conservative pundits, elected officials (including Tom McClintock), and organizations in CA and this strongly guided my support for the proposition.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.