Finally your Governors Debate will include the TERMINATOR himself.......Ahnold! Although, how intelligent/insightful of him to choose this particular debate where they all know the questions beforehand. :rolleyes:
Oh well, I agree that Cali is in need of help (on several fronts) unfortunately, I don't believe the GOP has the answers. http://www.corvetteforum.cc/zeroimg/smilies/nono.gif

Go Bustamante! :D

6:00pm P.S.T. & 8:00pm C.S.T. FOX NEWS Channel

I love the posts on this board, it is fun to watch how die hard some people are for their party, regardless of the other parties candidate.


TX you take the cake for the dems

And SCLexus3.0 takes the cake for the republicans

[QUOTE]Originally posted by TXSTYLE
Go Bustamante! :D

Gray Davis's Protégé :rolleyes:

Originally posted by EmeraldLexuSC3
[QUOTE]Originally posted by TXSTYLE
Go Bustamante! :D

Gray Davis's Protégé :rolleyes:

Isn't that the most tired label you've ever heard.... :rolleyes:

put another dem in office, New Mexico's population is growing and California businesses are relocating here, good stuff, keep pissing off your own people, I like it

I thought it was pretty funny when the other candidates, aside from Arnold, contemplated foregoing this debate (the only one Arnold wanted to attend) because the questions were pre-released to the candidates, which is helpful to Arnold. I think it was a mistake for Arnold to not attend the other debates, to me it showed that he is not prepared to thoroughly discuss the issues.

Originally posted by lex400sc
Isn't that the most tired label you've ever heard.... :rolleyes:

What is so refreshing about Bustamante?::boring:

Originally posted by jpa2400
I love the posts on this board, it is fun to watch how die hard some people are for their party, regardless of the other parties candidate.


TX you take the cake for the dems

And SCLexus3.0 takes the cake for the republicans

Although he is a DEM like Davis, I have listened to several talks with/about him, and he seems to be his own person/politician.

Well, I guess since I couldn't get a Demo up in the Gov's office here, I was kinda hoping Cali wouldn't let me down. :D

Well...........

There's always..............Gary Coleman. http://216.40.249.192/s/cwm/3dlil/eek13.gif

http://i.imdb.com/Photos/Mptv/1198/5725_0010.jpg

Originally posted by 93LexoGS300
to me it showed that he is not prepared to thoroughly discuss the issues.

Have you listened to his interviews on Larry King Live, talk radio, and various other venues? He only outlines the problems that everyone is already aware of, incites more anger, and avoids tough questions by blaming the fall-guy Gray Davis. For instance, he was asked about his career of violent movies and he said something like "that isn't real but what is real is Gray Davis screwing up the economy". WTF kind of answer is that? He just told us nothing about the question and instead tried to refocus our attention on how mad we are at Davis.

Arnold himself is very inexperienced with the issues, he has a lot of advisors. With the liklihood that he gets voted in office, I'm just glad he's surrounding himself with qualified professionals. He's kind of like Bush in a way: a popular character with no idea how to fill the job he's applying for, but surrounded by people that do. His fiscal conservativism will deteriorate CA's social services, but at least he is socially liberal. You guys are stuck with a liberal either way :p

Originally posted by EmeraldLexuSC3
What is so refreshing about Bustamante?::boring:

I dunno, maybe you should listen to what he has to say before you label him. :rolleyes:

Originally posted by SDuquette
put another dem in office, New Mexico's population is growing and California businesses are relocating here, good stuff, keep pissing off your own people, I like it

Gray Davis did make one good point. He is being recalled, not because he did anything illegal, but because people are unhappy with the California economy under his leadership. If that is the qualifier for recalling an executive, then perhaps George Bush, the man who owns the largest national deficit in the HISTORY of America should be looked at more closely.

Originally posted by lex400sc
His fiscal conservativism will deteriorate CA's social services

You make it sound like that's a bad thing, maybe too many people getting a free ride is a bad thing. You can't play Robin Hood and expect the people to just accept it, especially the people having the money stolen from them. That is the cause of the recall. BTW, the "let's blame everything on Bush" tactic is really getting lame, right there with dimple chads.

"I'm just glad he's surrounding himself with qualified professionals"


I guess I often gauge politicians that way. I don't think the single head figure is going to change my city, county, state or this nation, it is the people they surround themselves with is who makes the difference. The head figure, is well, just a head figure ;)

Same thing in business, you have most managers running around with no idea what they hell they are doing, but at long as they are good at getting their people to work for them, everything is peachy.

Originally posted by SDuquette
You make it sound like that's a bad thing, maybe too many people getting a free ride is a bad thing. You can't play Robin Hood and expect the people to just accept it, especially the people having the money stolen from them. That is the cause of the recall.

It's a little scary how selfish you sound here...

Originally posted by SDuquette
BTW, the "let's blame everything on Bush" tactic is really getting lame, right there with dimple chads.

Too bad.

How is that selfish?? Given there are some examples where people need some help, but whay should I pay to raise some drug dealer's kids because he is spending all his money on 22's and DVD's and his wife watches Oprah all day? Social services should be limited to those that are physically incapable of doing any work, or mentally incapable of doing any work. Other than that, anybody can work and make a living. Sure it might be a meager living, but it's a living.

Case in point. My father was put away, and my mother raised me by herself. She had a limited college education, but got by for a while. She saved up, we lived in family housing out of state while she got her degree, we scraped by, she made some of my clothes, I had few toys, I even had to stay by myself a bit, given this was k-3rd. She worked extremely hard in college and graduated in the top part of her class. She moved back home, and went back to her old job, and in the evenings worked on another business for her to do nights and weekends. She worked hard. At the time I don't think she even cleared $20k, yet she managed to put me through private school and and private high school. She still works hard and makes more than ever before, about $26k. She never once applied for government services, the only help she got was from student loans which she has paid off since then. Now if my mother can work hard and carry her own weight, some ******* who won't because because he's not worth $15/hr should be able to too, and no one should have to carry the weight for him.

Another example, a popular practice in New Mexico is to have a pile of kids, and not get married, that way one person can claim the kids and get money off the government. Who pays to raise their kids??? Me, and the other working individuals.

Back to the point, the People's Republic of California needs the kind of leadership that will give these people the kick in the ass they need to get out there and be productive. How the hell do you get out of a rut when you have these unproductive leeches sucking you dry?

There is nothing selfish about wanting to keep as much of the money I earn to myself and my family if the money they are taking from me is getting pissed away?? Why should they eat steak and shrimp on EBT while I am buying last day milk and balogna sandwiches with the money I earned??

I kind of feel you SDuquette, I watched some of my family MILK the system for 15 years living off of ME, every other tax paying citizen in this country, then just to turn around and be called "Greedy" because I educated myself and decided to WORK HARD.

The government is way to giving when it comes to hand outs. People just don't want to work, you can work anywhere and make $6-8 an hours, there is no pride when your broke and taking money away from people \ purposes \ services who really need them because your lazy, well you should be shot, including my own family, where is my glock.......

I just finished watching the debates. It was pretty good, though a bit constrained. I wish they'd expand it to a 3 hour debate instead of 90 min. Everyone was just so rushed they couldn't get their entire message out. Everyone was very convincing also. One candidate I've ruled out for sure is Tom McClintock. Though he had a nice closing speech, it disturbed me that he promised to cut state programs. Anyone else from Arnold to Camejo is a promising vote from me.

I will give my $.02 on the debate tonight...

Bustamante: Did NOT assert himself strongly/well enough. His goals are legitimate enough though.
Arianna: Talked a good talk and provided humor to the debate (as did Ahnold) but for the most part, needs to stick with writing.
McClintok is CONSERVATIVE with a Capital "C", and obviously has NO clue what "working class, lower income, and minorities" are, and could care less. As such is the case with extreme conservatives like himself.
Camejo: Had some VERY legit points and did not come across as a "true politician", unfortunately he hasn't got a chance in the world.
And my boy Arnold: (only in movies though :D ) Surprisingly, his 'spinmeisters' did a pretty good job with his speeches, if not mostly repatitive. I like Ahnold so much as a Movie Star, that it's almost hard to not like him in his quest. But...........http://www.corvetteforum.cc/zeroimg/smilies/nono.gif He needs to stick with Hollywood in some form or another. ;)

Bustamante's closing speech was anticlimactic compared to everyone else's. He was a little reserved throughout the entire debate, but I think he was humbled by all the indirect attacks by Arianna and Arnold. Camejo's closing speech had me smiling from ear to ear. It's too bad his political message---however true---will probably kill his chances, 'cause he sounds very smart, especially financially. That doesn't mean I won't vote for him though. Arianna came out ahead in this debate, she presented her points well and took the jabs well too. Her closing speech really put a damper on Bustamante and Arnold. Arnold was pretty repetitive. He didn't really add any new insight to his campaign. He delivered the same message as his commercial and interviews. McClinton sounded pretty moderate and agreeable until the end, where he lost me.

Every candidate made outrageously self-serving or in some cases clearly erroneous statements, but that could be expected from the overall tone of the debate, which was more of a verbal free-for-all than an organized, measured discussion of the issues

Bustamante tossed out numbers and percentages throughout the debate, almost none of them supported by the real statistics. For example he asserted, "70 percent of the people who our food are (illegal) immigrants." In fact, even the State employment officials have no idea what the exact percentage is, but Bustamante made it sound official.

Camejo, stated categorically that "Latinos in California pay a higher tax rate than European Americans," an assertion that even tax experts cannot pin down.

Schwarzenegger and Huffington were just as clueless or misleading in some of their statements. Both were more focused on each other and seemed to demonstrate a particular dislike for each other, at times interacting as if the other three candidates and debate moderator simply were not there.

Schwarzenegger claimed politicians just want to keep raising taxes when, in fact, California tax rates are lower now than at any time in the past 10 years. His debate strategy seemed to bounce back and forth between vague generalities and snappy one-liners. In his only debate, he failed to solidify himself as a person with a firm grasp of the state's problems, and how they can be solved.

Huffington’s brillant statement that construction should be stopped on the Delano prison project, thus giving the state $600 million it could use on education and other necessities. In fact, that project is being constructed with bond money. If stopped, the state would receive no financial support.

I feel McClintock made the best impression, in large part because he stated, without equivocation, his opposition to raising taxes, his opposition to abortion and his support of the right to bear arms. He also pledged to abolish the car tax, slash state spending, including eliminating several state bureaucracies and reform workmen’s compensation.

Ok.... First off, I don't think Awww-nuld can do anything proactive for the state.

I don't care for anyone of the candidates personally.

Huffington is a joke

the only ones that might be able to do anything for the state in my opinion is McClintock or Bustamante if he can make clear the sources of his facts.

Originally posted by SDuquette
Another example, a popular practice in New Mexico is to have a pile of kids, and not get married, that way one person can claim the kids and get money off the government. Who pays to raise their kids??? Me, and the other working individuals.

Which reminds me - notice how many talk shows and news stories are whining sob stories about some single parent or even two parents making, say, $30K a year, who can't make it with their *5* or more children? Maybe they should have thought about it while they were MAKING all those children. Now *WE* have to pay for all their fun in the sack and will probably be robbed by those same kids who have problems later in life.

You need a license or permit to do just about anything in the U.S. except MAKE OTHER PEOPLE. I think we should tax people PER CHILD, not give them tax relief as we do today.

Originally posted by bitkahuna
Which reminds me - notice how many talk shows and news stories are whining sob stories about some single parent or even two parents making, say, $30K a year, who can't make it with their *5* or more children? Maybe they should have thought about it while they were MAKING all those children. Now *WE* have to pay for all their fun in the sack and will probably be robbed by those same kids who have problems later in life.

You need a license or permit to do just about anything in the U.S. except MAKE OTHER PEOPLE. I think we should tax people PER CHILD, not give them tax relief as we do today.

we need population growth or else our country will go to hell :D

my opinion on the debates- Arriana just went around attacking everything, bush, capitalism, ahnold... kinda forgot she was running for governor of California and not for the queen of the worldArnold did pretty well for... Arnold haha

Bustamante just seemed detached, didnt make too many points, just rode the debate out and played the career politician which alot of californians are tired of

McClintock- made some good points I kinda like prop 54, need to read up on it more though. I think he did a good job in the debate he knows his stuff and did well in the debate

Larry King invited both Gray Davis and Arnold to have an open, unscripted debate on his show. Gray Davis accepted, Arnold declined. A very telling story about just how qualified Arnold is, or isn't, in holding a position in public office. Gray Davis even pointed out that Arnold doesn't even vote regularly in state and national elections. He has not voted more times than he has voted. And he has abstained from all debates that were not prescripted for his advisors to puppet him around in. I think he's just another tool the GOP is rallying behind because he's a sure thing, which is a very sad reflection on behalf of Californian's political awareness.

Originally posted by lex400sc
Larry King invited both Gray Davis and Arnold to have an open, unscripted debate on his show. Gray Davis accepted, Arnold declined. A very telling story about just how qualified Arnold is, or isn't, in holding a position in public office.
Not necessarily, It can also show ones desperation, since the polls are now showing that Arnold is leading the race.

Gray Davis even pointed out that Arnold doesn't even vote regularly in state and national elections. He has not voted more times than he has voted.
This kind of prerequisite does not necessarily make one a Good Governor. :rolleyes:

And he has abstained from all debates that were not prescripted for his advisors to puppet him around in.
Davis choose to be selective as well.

I think he's just another tool the GOP is rallying behind because he's a sure thing, which is a very sad reflection on behalf of Californian's political awareness.
I have to agree with you on this, there are other canditates that are more aware and qualified.

Originally posted by EmeraldLexuSC3
Not necessarily, It can also show ones desperation, since the polls are now showing that Arnold is leading the race.

You forget that this Larry King invitation preceeded the latest polls, which you speak of. Arnold is the only major candidate that was invited to every debate, but declined all but the scripted one. He castigates Davis when no one can talk back, but he is unwilling to have a real debate about the real issues and how they differ in their management style. Arnold is a walking one-liner. All he can do is repeat the same insults and complaints fed through the teleprompter. If he really cared about California, he would have this debate so that his superior ideas would embarass the hell out of Davis' and seal the deal on the election putting to end the question of just how superior his leadership skills are to Davis'. That way, even if he didn't win the race, and Davis did stay in office, he will have at least voiced his opinion to the nation and if they are good opinions, there would be statewide pressures to impliment those ideas.

Originally posted by EmeraldLexuSC3
This kind of prerequisite does not necessarily make one a Good Governor. :rolleyes:

But it does show who would make a bad governor. He only voted in 8 of the last 21 elections. How much does he really care about government when he won't even vote for the leadership even half the time? How familiar does this make him with the issues?

Originally posted by EmeraldLexuSC3
Davis choose to be selective as well.

If I'm not mistaken, Davis wasn't invited to the debates.

Originally posted by EmeraldLexuSC3
I have to agree with you

:eek1: :D

Originally posted by lex400sc
Larry King invited both Gray Davis and Arnold to have an open, unscripted debate on his show. Gray Davis accepted, Arnold declined. A very telling story about just how qualified Arnold is, or isn't, in holding a position in public office. Gray Davis even pointed out that Arnold doesn't even vote regularly in state and national elections. He has not voted more times than he has voted. And he has abstained from all debates that were not prescripted for his advisors to puppet him around in. I think he's just another tool the GOP is rallying behind because he's a sure thing, which is a very sad reflection on behalf of Californian's political awareness.

On your last point first, California isn't much different than anywhere else. As far as whether Arnold declining an unscripted debate is 'telling' about how qualified is, it just means he and his advisors weighed whether he really needed to do the debate to win or not and concluded he didn't. This isn't about winning debates or having the most air time only, it's about doing what is necessary to win.

Originally posted by bitkahuna
This isn't about winning debates or having the most air time only, it's about doing what is necessary to win.

Touche, but do you think Arnold's team really had that kind of foresight? He was behind in all the polls this entire time until yesterday's CNN/Gallop poll.

And Davis is claiming the results of the CNN poll are wrong. :rolleyes:

On CNN news last night Arnold refused to have one on one debate w/ Davis on Larry King show. I wonder why? :rolleyes:

Originally posted by lex400sc
Touche, but do you think Arnold's team really had that kind of foresight? He was behind in all the polls this entire time until yesterday's CNN/Gallop poll.

I just think they didn't think the unscripted debates were worth the risk. You play the hand you're dealt and see who else is fidgeting. :D

Well I guess it's working out for him. Let's see just how aggressive other candidates get in these final days. Speaking of which I haven't received my voter catalog in the mail yet, I'm starting to get worried... :(

If Bustamante quits, maybe Davis will survive the recall. I see Huffington has just bailed, vowing to fight the recall, anything to stop Ahnold. :D

I just wish McClintock would bail because that would seal the deal for the Terminator.

Originally posted by bitkahuna
If Bustamante quits, maybe Davis will survive the recall. I see Huffington has just bailed, vowing to fight the recall, anything to stop Ahnold. :D

I just wish McClintock would bail because that would seal the deal for the Terminator.

I just wish everyone would quit and put an end to this recall nonsense :)

Originally posted by lex400sc
I just wish everyone would quit and put an end to this recall nonsense :)
Nonsense should end come October 7th ;)

Originally posted by EmeraldLexuSC3
Nonsense should end come October 7th ;)

I hope you're right: vote no on recall! :D

Originally posted by lex400sc
I hope you're right: vote no on recall! :D

I thought you were FOR the recall before? Didn't you say it was a purer form of Democracy or something?

Originally posted by bitkahuna
I thought you were FOR the recall before? Didn't you say it was a purer form of Democracy or something?

That's before I realized the stucture of the recall election...

49% of the population can vote for Davis to stay in office
15% of the population can vote for Arnold to replace him

And with those figures Arnold would win the election and become the new governor when 85% of the population did not want him there and over three times as many votes went to Davis than him.

That whole process is not very democratic to me.

Also I was not formerly aware of the comparatively low low percentage of the 'general' population (not voting population) it requires to recall a state official.

And finally I did not realize that a recall does not require any criminal wrongdoing, or the breaking of even a single law to enact. This combined with the last revelation sets a dangerous precendence for reversing the democratic institutions we have set in place. Hiram Johnson did not forsee this when he designed an otherwise good function. As much as I dislike Davis' past policies, I dislike even further the dangerous trend this unprecedented election may spell.