Posted on 04/05/2006 8:11:08 PM PDT by FairOpinion
The Democratic candidates for governor ratcheted up their rhetoric Wednesday in their first debate, as state Treasurer Phil Angelides belittled state Controller Steve Westly as a "twin" of Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger and Westly shot back that Angelides "has never seen a tax he doesn't like."
Angelides supports raising taxes on corporations and the wealthy to fully fund education. Westly has said he would do a better job of collecting taxes at the current level and try to get more money from the state lottery.
Angelides also said Westly has supported raising taxes in a variety of ways. Westly supports Proposition 82, which would raise taxes on the wealthy to pay for universal preschool. Angelides also supports the measure. And in 2003, Westly gave interviews saying he supported raising taxes to balance the state budget.
(Excerpt) Read more at mercurynews.com ...
OR Schwarzenegger, who steadfastly refused to raise taxes, despite the Dem pressures.
That's what it boils down to.
Arnold will win. Unfortunately, he waited too long for his reforms in 2005 that would have REALLY changed things. But he'll make for an excellent blocker for 4 more years.
Who knows? Maybe events will turn in his favor at some point and let him shake things up again. Only time can tell.
Arnold is also refusing to sign the minimum wage increase with automatic inflation adjustment, a bill the Dems passed. A Dem governor would sign it, we would be stuck with it and it would really hurt the businesses in CA.
As many of you are fond of telling me, I ain`t to bright sometimes, but, between there two bozos and Arnold, why is this even a contest?
vs. borrow and spend Schwarzenegger
A Republican governor would oppose ALL efforts to raise the minimum wage.
The Dems would sign the min wage bill with inflation adjustment provisions, Arnold won't.
The Dems are on record that they will sign the homosexual marriage act, Arnold vetoed it.
The Dems keep trying to pass the drivers licenses for illegals bill, Arnold made them change it once, and vetoed it the second time.
Arnold also brought back CA from the brink of bankruptcy, and also reformed Workers Comp, which was making businesses leave CA.
The Dems can hardly wait to raise taxes, Arnold refused to do so.
How can any rational person say that there is no difference between Arnold and the Dems?
Well, they aren't making much headway in that direction, are they?
I think there is only four of them.
But they use about ten names.
Just imagine what that poor state would be like today if DAVIS was still the Governor?
A. Unions spent hundreds of millions beating on him in 2005.
B. It's a D state.
He'll win in the end, but it'll be close.
"I think there is only four of them."
Not much of a crowd, is it.
In the meantime, real conservatives and Republicans are realizing what's at stake and are lining up behind Arnold.
Poll: Schwarzenegger approval ranking inching higher
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1609324/posts
"Most of that momentum is fueled by higher rankings among the GOP faithful...Republicans seem to have recovered from the disappointment; 70 percent of them now approve of his job performance, compared to 61 percent in January. "
They can't. They aren't rational people.
You can rationally (wrongly, I'd say) argue that because he's not doing enough, Republicans will get blamed for bad things that happen, it'll screw up the party etc.
It's a bad arguement, but a rational one.
Those 'no difference' folks are not rational people.
He's been taking these beatings since before Arnold was elected. FairOpinion's been the Arnold point man, and he's done a good job.
Oh yeah, they're Democrats, and therefore, professional liars.
Nevermind. I get it.
Thank you, I guess that's meant to be a compliment.
I am not an "Arnold point man", but since I live in CA, I have a vested interest in not allowing it to be destroyed by Dems, while claiming I am allowing and helping it to happen, all in the name of "conservative principles".
Nobody could explain, how does it help "conservaitve principles" to help Dems get elected and help them destroy CA.
Can you imagine where CA would be, if Gray Davis were still governor, or if Bustamante had been elected?
I just mean that you are the guy who has brought to the attention of folks around here the many positive things about Arnold, and you've done a good job of explaining why some things we would like him to do really aren't possible under the current structure.
Thanks for the clarification.
Yes, indeed, Arnold is governor, not "emperor" and he has to deal with an overwhelmingly Democrat Legislature.
It is remarkable what he has been able to achieve, given the circumstances.
If we had a Dem governor, the Dem Legislature together with the Dem governor, would have raised taxes significantly, had regulated businesses even more, which would have resulted in more businesses fleeing CA, less jobs, less tax revenue, so more increased taxes, until CA would end up being a third world country.
A Dem governor would have signed the licenses for illegals and homosexual marriage bill, further eroding the cultural and moral fabric of CA, and quite possibly pushed CA over the brink, past the point of no return.
We will never really appreciate, from what disaster Arnold saved CA.
He also had the courage to take on the Public Employees Unions, try to curtail spending, with his Special election propositions, despite the odds.
Even though he was defeated, he probably will start to resurrect some of them piece meal, after the election. BUt first he has to win.
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.