Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

CA: Gov. Might Consider Tax Hike, Aide Says (FoR education)
LA Times ^ | 12/17/05 | Evan Halper

Posted on 12/17/2005 8:59:09 AM PST by NormsRevenge

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-52 next last
To: FairOpinion

Gee, how considerate of a moderate to care about what a conservative thinks. don't see that very often, especially around here.

btw, I wasn't polled, were you?

Looks like time for Plan B and field a real conservative and not a pretender.

Haven't we wasted enough elections already running moderates and not backing conservative candidates, even when they poll well or win party primaries.

Oh, that should show ya what I think of your boy and his handlers.


21 posted on 12/17/2005 2:03:49 PM PST by NormsRevenge (Semper Fi ... Monthly Donor spoken Here. Go to ... https://secure.freerepublic.com/donate/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: FairOpinion

How can you spew that stuff with a clear conscience?


22 posted on 12/17/2005 2:10:02 PM PST by FOG724 (http://nationalgrange.org/legislation/phpBB2/index.php)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: FairOpinion
Arnold put Prop. 76 on the ballot to CUT SPENDING... It's the fault of the CA voters, who didn't vote for Prop. 76, if Arnold may not have any choice, but the raise taxes, exactly what the Dems want...

Same old tiresome lies, Fair Opinion. They must pay you a lot to keep posting this stuff. As you have been shown, on numerous occasions, even Arnold's Prop 76 Campaign Manager said this would not cut spending.

One more time....

"The key is not to crank government spending down," said Tom Campbell, Schwarzenegger's former finance director, who left the post to campaign for the initiative. "It's just to spend no more than we have."
San Diego Union-Tribune, October 21, 2005

But Campbell said he has looked forward starting in 2006, which is when the measure would take effect, and doesn't believe that the cap would have an impact on state spending until 2013. "That's because we start with three good years of revenue behind us," he said. "It completely depends on what year you start."
San Francisco Chronicle, October 22, 2005


23 posted on 12/17/2005 2:21:34 PM PST by calcowgirl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Amerigomag; FairOpinion
Contrary to the myths promoted in the reply, Prop 76 was an initiative designed to accomplish 3 things. Give the appearance of spending reductions, authorize more illegal borrowing and protect Prop 58 lenders from repercussions should the state go south financially. Prop 76 was opposed by both the left and the right in California and failed at the polls by the widest margin (38/62) of the four proposals promoted by the executive.

Yep. Prop 76 was all about borrowing--not spending. From the Los Angeles Times, October 24, 2005

Interviewed on public television's "California Connected" last week, Schwarzenegger said: "Look, we don't have enough money to build hospitals, … freeways, bridges. We need more energy. We need to make sure we have the cleanest environment…. We need more water, we need more of everything. And more affordable housing, which is the biggest problem of all."

(snip)

But how does the state, facing a deficit projected at $6 billion next year, live within its means without raising taxes — while spending more to build things?

The governor must be a magician.

Actually, Schwarzenegger and his chief fiscal advisor, Tom Campbell, do offer answers for the money mystery. One answer is to borrow more with infrastructure bonds.

The Schwarzenegger administration is considering an ambitious bond program to fix freeway bottlenecks, improve access to cargo ports, shore up Delta levees, upgrade water facilities and quake-proof hospitals.

But the state first should get its cash flow in order, says Campbell, who's on leave as state finance director to promote Prop. 76. "We'd go to the market with a substantially better balance sheet and bond rating if 76 passes," he says. "That means lower interest."


24 posted on 12/17/2005 2:43:19 PM PST by calcowgirl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: RS
Just how was McClintock suckered into supporting it then ?

He wasn't. He made a pragmatic decision. A decision worthy of a politician.

McClintock was running for Lt. Governor on the Republican ticket. McClintock had neither the financial or orginazational resources to conduct a successful, state wide campaign without the assistance of the CAGOP and the RNC. The support appears a straight forward reciprocation. Support the CAGOP and secure their continued benevolence.

Only McClintock knows the compendium of reasons behind his public pronouncements but two things are certain to politcal observers. 1) It wasn't out of loyalty to the CAGOP after their stunt in Aug 2003 which stung the then gubernatorial candidate and 2) it wasn't out of support for the core issues contained in Prop 76, borrowing and lender protection, which McClintock had railed against prior to his ordination by the CAGOP.

Ironically, today, in the face of the recent shenanigans by the Austrian, the CAGOP probably needs McClintock's image as much as McClintock needs the CAGOP's resources.

25 posted on 12/17/2005 2:44:55 PM PST by Amerigomag
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: calcowgirl
"We'd go to the market with a substantially better balance sheet and bond rating if 76 passes,"

For those from Rio Linda here's the translation.

If we can borrow an additional $5-$8B, delaying our on-paper deficit and allay the fears of the lending community by granting them constitutional protection precluding renegotiated repayment schedules for previous bonding, we'd go to the market in a much stronger position to borrow another $50B.

26 posted on 12/17/2005 2:53:02 PM PST by Amerigomag
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: Amerigomag; SierraWasp; Carry_Okie; NormsRevenge; tubebender; forester; goldstategop; Czar; ...
If we can borrow an additional $5-$8B, delaying our on-paper deficit and allay the fears of the lending community by granting them constitutional protection precluding renegotiated repayment schedules for previous bonding, we'd go to the market in a much stronger position to borrow another $50B.

Excellent translation of the true Prop 76 intent. Bookmarked!

27 posted on 12/17/2005 3:01:23 PM PST by calcowgirl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: NormsRevenge
The unions will get what they want. I don't see the public disagreeing with higher taxes - after all, its for the children.

(Denny Crane: "I Don't Want To Socialize With A Pinko Liberal Democrat Commie.Say What You Like About Republicans. We Stick To Our Convictions. Even When We Know We're Dead Wrong.")

28 posted on 12/17/2005 3:04:39 PM PST by goldstategop (In Memory Of A Dearly Beloved Friend Who Lives On In My Heart Forever)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NormsRevenge; calcowgirl
There would be tons of money for education if we went back to the Three Rs and dropped all the PC mandates too numerous to list here...
29 posted on 12/17/2005 3:27:40 PM PST by tubebender (You can't make Chicken Salad from Chicken Bleep...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Amerigomag

"He wasn't. He made a pragmatic decision. "

Is that a nice way of you calling him a liar ?

That for whatever reason he was attempting to get others to support a prop that YOU say he personally did not support the "core issues" of ? ... a prop that if passed you want us to believe would leave us worse off then we are now.

Good thing you warned us about this CINO !


30 posted on 12/17/2005 3:38:16 PM PST by RS (Just because they are out to get him doesn't mean he is not guilty)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: RS
a liar ?, CINO !

McClintock is neither. He's a politician. That's why political speech is legally exempt from strict scrutiny.

McClintock's historical positions are known to both Google and our archives. Some effort and a little experience is required but the results are informative. Insightful search strings are our friends.

31 posted on 12/17/2005 3:55:24 PM PST by Amerigomag
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: calcowgirl; Amerigomag
Amerigomag hit it right between the eyes. But it's going to be a lot more than $5B-$8B. That's chump change for Ambitious Arnold and Sacramento.

If RINO Arnold goes for a tax increase/new taxes, it will be equivalent to submittal of a resignation letter just ahead of the Recall Petitions.

We recalled one liberal jackass. It shouldn't be that difficult to recall an even more liberal jackass.

Bring it on.

32 posted on 12/17/2005 3:58:13 PM PST by Czar (StillFedUptotheTeeth@Washington)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: Amerigomag

"That's why political speech is legally exempt from strict scrutiny."

I don't think the scrutiny has to be too strict when he makes a commerical urging people to vote for something that is against his supposed core beliefs - perhaps everything he has said before deserves to be put under some kind of scrutiny.


You've opened our eyes to this CINO, and are deserving of all the credit and accolades that go with it -


33 posted on 12/17/2005 4:31:47 PM PST by RS (Just because they are out to get him doesn't mean he is not guilty)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: RS; Amerigomag; calcowgirl; Carry_Okie; NormsRevenge; ElkGroveDan; dalereed
"Good thing you warned us about this CINO !"

Who? You? You're the one that shallowly thinks that anyone who cannot tolerate A.S. and his Kennedys is automatically a total psychophant of McClintock. You sound exactly like the GovernMental EnvironMentalists who chant that if you don't buy their bogus BS, that you're automatically "against the environment!"

Just got to your room and stand on your head in the corner until some blood manages to trickle down to you starving brain, will ya???

34 posted on 12/17/2005 4:38:10 PM PST by SierraWasp (The CAGOP is now ruled in secret by the SS!!! Sundheim & SchwartzenRenegger!!! Oh! & the Kennedys!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: NormsRevenge
Arnuld has gone off his medication.
35 posted on 12/17/2005 4:41:41 PM PST by pointsal
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RS
perhaps everything he has said before deserves to be put under some kind of scrutiny.

With my blessing. Exposing the Republican masses to conservative thought usually results in a convert. Usually.

36 posted on 12/17/2005 4:52:32 PM PST by Amerigomag
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: Amerigomag

"Exposing the Republican masses to conservative thought usually results in a convert. "

Would you still like them converted if they were exposed to the "conservative thought" espoused by McClintock in his commercials promoting Prop 76 ?


37 posted on 12/17/2005 7:15:32 PM PST by RS (Just because they are out to get him doesn't mean he is not guilty)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: RS
"conservative thought"

An interesting observation. Most apparently believed the thought was partisan.

Both the left and the right voted NO on Prop 76 leaving only the 19% in the center that bothered to vote alone on the decks of the USS Wilson, either transfixed in the headlights of celebrity or wrapped in their partisan mantle as its Austrian captain, occupied with hurling taunting, personal insults at a plurality of the electorate, steered the great ship of deceit into the shoals.

38 posted on 12/17/2005 9:02:30 PM PST by Amerigomag
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: calcowgirl; SierraWasp; NormsRevenge
``She indicated to me that things are not going right in the Legislature. We need to make some changes,'' he said. ``She thinks Arnold can make those and she wants to help him. I take her at her word.''

In the movie "Animal House", the frat boys destroy the car of Flounder's brother. As Flounder stares at the wrecked auto, Belushi puts his arm around Flounder and says "You f***ed up Flounder, you trusted us."

Why the leaders of the party continue with this attitude is beyond me. Don't they understand that the changes she wants to make is to eliminate republican obstructionism to the Democrat's socialist agenda? Do the party leaders really believe that a "socialism slow is better then socialism fast" platform is good long term strategy? Better yet, are they so naive as to think that the base won't desert the party in droves over this type of muddle through policy?

39 posted on 12/17/2005 9:25:33 PM PST by forester (An economy that is overburdened by government eventually results in collapse)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: forester; calcowgirl
Well, Mrs. Wasp and I have been two of the "droves" since the 2002 November election!!!

And calcowgirl, before we rejoin the Party, we figure we're on the outside looking in anyways, so what's the difference? We can still foment and torment from out here just as good as if we were card carrying ignored members, right? Right!!! (rhetorical questions once again)(grin)

40 posted on 12/17/2005 9:39:26 PM PST by SierraWasp (The CAGOP is now ruled in secret by the SS!!! Sundheim & SchwartzenRenegger!!! Oh! & the Kennedys!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-52 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson