# Anybody catch the California debate?



## pknox (Sep 24, 2003)

I saw about 1/2 of it.  Seemed like Bustamante, Huffington, and Arnold basically took turns bashing each other, while everybody else was pretty tame.  Some excellent issues were raised, including the status of illegal immigrants, possible tax plans, racism, and education.  From what I saw, Arnold seemed to hold his own.  Definitely one of the more lively exchanges as far as a debate goes.  For those of you that saw it, what did you think?  I'm especially interested in what the Californians out there have to say.


----------



## KenpoTess (Sep 25, 2003)

*shudders and twitches*   shies away from politics jus cuz


----------



## Ender (Sep 25, 2003)

Well..it's comfirmed. Ariana and Camejo are definitely idiots. they both need a Economics 101class.

 Bustamonte came across as very sincere, but still another idiot. He did gain some respect from me because of his sincerity.

Mclintok was straightforward and didn't attack anyone. like they said, he is unwavering and you always knows where he stands.

Arnold did alright, but is not what you call a quick thinker. Which is ok if you surround yourself with good people.


----------



## pknox (Sep 25, 2003)

> _Originally posted by KenpoTess _
> **shudders and twitches*   shies away from politics jus cuz  *



Oh, I'm exactly the same almost all of the time -- but this was actually much more interesting than most.  At times it seemed more like an episode of Springer than a debate.


----------



## cali_tkdbruin (Sep 25, 2003)

Yup, I watched it. Good entertainment for those of us who are, or were Poli Sci majors in college. 

Anyway, Ariana Huffington sure made it a point to keep taking swipes at the *Terminator * AHH-Nold.  I think she behaved, and came across as a buttwipe. In any event, I'm no Arnold for governor proponent, and I'm certainly not voting for him but I did think he handled himself pretty well. He had some pretty good come backs for Huffington's attacks. I especially liked his comment about driving his Hummer through the income tax loopholes that Huffy took advantage of even though she's a very wealthy woman...


----------



## arnisador (Sep 25, 2003)

I would have liked to watch it but I missed it.


----------



## pknox (Sep 26, 2003)

> _Originally posted by cali_tkdbruin _
> *Yup, I watched it. Good entertainment for those of us who are, or were Poli Sci majors in college.
> 
> Anyway, Ariana Huffington sure made it a point to keep taking swipes at the Terminator  AHH-Nold.  I think she behaved, and came across as a buttwipe. In any event, I'm no Arnold for governor proponent, and I'm certainly not voting for him but I did think he handled himself pretty well. He had some pretty good come backs for Huffington's attacks. I especially liked his comment about driving his Hummer through the income tax loopholes that Huffy took advantage of even though she's a very wealthy woman...  *



That was a good one.  I also liked when he was asked to respond to Huffington's attack on how he supposedly treats women -  he comes back with, "I think I have a part for you in Terminator 4."  Sweet.


----------



## pknox (Sep 26, 2003)

> _Originally posted by arnisador _
> *I would have liked to watch it but I missed it. *



Don't worry, they'll only rerun the thing about a billion times.


----------



## rmcrobertson (Sep 26, 2003)

I'm in California, and I refuse to vote in this "election." 60 or 70 million, spent at a time when we can't afford it (too busy building prisons and hiking the salaries of prison guards in this, "liberal," state), pushed by a stupid voter's initiative, started by a weak little creep, Darryl Issa, all based on blaming Grey Davis the way the Corn God used to get blamed for a lack of rain? It's nonsense, and I ain't playin'. All anybody needed to do was wait a little, and vote Davis' silly tail out of there...but nooooo.

As for the "debate," it wasn't even particularly funny. Huffington--who appears to be getting a lot of flak for being...well...a girl--is great on, "Left Right and Center," and utterly unelectable, probably with good reason. Arnold's clearly utterly innocent of political knowledge, and equally clearly knows zip about money/the state/the environment/business, recited scripted one-liners (they had the questions in advance) and pulled stuff like claiming that he was a businessman. McClintock? He's gonna lose, fortunately, because his economic ideas are a big chunk of what created this mess to begin with--not that he started it, but that the same old tired nonsense about "deregulation," and "liberating businesses to produce," is just what they started doing before the economy bubble blew. 

And before anybody starts yelling that I don't know what I'm talking about,  take a breath and remember: a) this is a real bad couple of years to drone on about all that business does for America--Enron? 140 million? any of that ring a bell?--b) Life Savers and Levi's are no longer made in this country, because the workers wanted (those bastards!) wages and benefits, c) THEY ALREADY DID LARGELY DEREGULATE, THE AIRLINES, THE ENERGY COMPANIES, AND WALL STREET, which helped produce the massive economic upturn, job recovery, and general sense of well-being we're now experiencing. Wait..I know. Not ENOUGH deregulation, right? "Well, yes, Mrs. Peters, arsenic IS making you ill, so I think we're going to need to give you a lot more of it." I always find it hilarious when people start telling me about the ethics of the marketplace...and the civic responsibility of American businesses...

The Green Party guy? Utterly sensible, incapable of running the State, way out of any historical context that could possibly get him elected. 
Which leaves Bustamante (and by the way, just LOVE all the racist jokes about his name I've been hearing from right-wing talk show hosts), the present Lieutenant Governor. Oh joy. He's almost certainly going to be elected, which means that all the money and all the attention & energy goes into, essentially, ending up back where we started from. And then? Business as usual.

This is nuts. At least Watergate was entertaining.


----------



## Ender (Sep 26, 2003)

Well we can't wait. The deficit is growing larger and larger because of the same ol liberal policies that got us here. California is now junk bond graded. that means we have to pay out large amounts of interest DAILY. 

lets look at some of these policies in a factual manner.

let's tax the rich!...well good idea. But the rich are the ones who provide jobs. For every $30k of income they get, 4 jobs are created. In california the tax schedule is leveraged towards the rich (over $50K is rich according to the tax schedules) and when you do that and the economy slows down, then tax revenues decrease dramatically. Especially if the upper 1% lose money as when the DOTCOM bubble burst.
  Then you have the proportion that the "rich" pay. the top 1% pay 50% of the taxes in Calif. it doesn't take a degree in math to figure out that if 50% of your revenue is greatly reduced (and now you're dependant on it), then this will have profound effects on your budgets.

as for Enron...ask Mr. Davis how much money he took from them. (it's in the hundreds of thousands) and why He had them "consulting" him to solve this "crisis".

De-regultaton works. Plain and simple. But it has to be done correctly. Not in the socialistic manner the Democratic party espouses. It has to be balanced with respect to the consumers, Government and providers. If you look at he airline industry you can see before and after De-regulation. we now have many more planes in the air, many more travel hubs, and much much lower prices.

The economy "Blew" because of DOTCOM speculation. pure and simple. anytime you have a "speculation buble" it's bound to burst. It's only a matter of time. Interestingly, all other industries became more efficient with overall prices becoming lower.


----------



## cali_tkdbruin (Sep 26, 2003)

> _Originally posted by rmcrobertson _
> *I'm in California, and I refuse to vote in this "election." 60 or 70 million, spent at a time when we can't afford it (too busy building prisons and hiking the salaries of prison guards in this, "liberal," state), pushed by a stupid voter's initiative, started by a weak little creep, Darryl Issa, all based on blaming Grey Davis the way the Corn God used to get blamed for a lack of rain? It's nonsense, and I ain't playin'. All anybody needed to do was wait a little, and vote Davis' silly tail out of there...but nooooo.
> 
> *



This is why I'm voting *NO* on this recall. My state is already in the red, and now we're spending millions (my taxpayer *$* BTW) on this recall. 

I don't F___in' get it. So what happens when a Republican is in office and he F___s up? Is this going to become a recurring cycle, with the taxpayers (me) footing the bill for these recall elections? 

We, Californians voted Davis in, so, just let the lame duck finish it out.

BTW, if you're going to recall politicians, why not start at the top with George Dubya? Aren't we in a recession right about now, and aren't people out of work nationwide same as in Cali???


----------



## Ender (Sep 26, 2003)

> _Originally posted by cali_tkdbruin _
> *This is why I'm voting NO on this recall. My state is already in the red, and now we're spending millions (my taxpayer $ BTW) on this recall.
> 
> I don't F___in' get it. So what happens when a Republican is in office and he F___s up? Is this going to become a recurring cycle, with the taxpayers (me) footing the bill for these recall elections?
> ...



Yes you are confused..*L

first of all, the cost of the election is much less than what we are paying per WEEK because our bond rating went down . in other words, we are paying over $75 million in ADDED interest because we have the deficits and the bond rating went from grade A to ccc..(junk bond status)

now as far as the economy is concerned:

Friday , September 26, 2003
Reuters

WASHINGTON  Healthy consumer spending nudged economic growth ahead at a slightly faster second-quarter pace than previously thought, the Commerce Department (search) said Friday, setting the stage for a second-half surge in growth

Many forecasters anticipate GDP growth is set to accelerate to rates of four percent or higher in the third and fourth quarters, supported by a buoyant housing market and by lean inventories that imply businesses have more incentive to make new investments.
Analysts said the upwardly revised GDP report buttressed predictions for a continuing pickup in activity.

"This is again very positive and it suggests there's good forward momentum in the economy," said economist John Silvia of Wachovia Securities in Charlotte, N.C......



So we are coming out of the Clinton recession and well on the way to recovery. (yes the recession started under Clinton)


----------



## rmcrobertson (Sep 26, 2003)

Dear Ender:

Wow. You're trippin', and I mean that in the 1960s sense.

But you're absolutely right. The "Wall Street Journal," that hotbed of liberalism, is calling our present economy a, "jobless recovery." The market crashed--again!--last two-three days. The national budget's 550 billion in the hole and headed south rapidly. Surveys indicate Bush's job approval is falling pretty hard. The dollar just dropped against the yen. Gas prices are down. Everything's great.

No wait, I forgot--it's the liberals who are to blame! If we'd just had more tax cuts, more deregulation than we had in the last two years, everything would be fine!

Because look at our strengths. Everybody loves the improved service and convenience they experience on the airlines, especially after JetBlue (a product of deregulation) sold all their passengers' travel info to the military. Workers feel better than ever about their security, their benefits, their prospects, their bosses. Americans enjoy the way that their average workweek creeps up more and more, as does their commuting time. The American family is doing better than ever, what with the extra time parents have to spend with their kids and the lowered levels of stress.

Oh, and education? What with "no child left behind," and more testing and more unfunded mandates, schools are getting better and better and better. There're more uniforms! Everybody's saying the Pledge! test scores are up, violence is down! 

And, respect for our political institutions has never been greater. Nobody at all believes that Bush & Co. have anything to do with making money out of the reconstruction of Iraq. We found those WMDs. We linked the Saddam government to Al Quaida directly. And with the end of attacks on our soldiers, and the way the government is letting our soldiers go home earlier than planned, why, everything's just great, especially now that everything's all settled in Afghanistan. And the spread of nuclear weapons? naw, not a problem at all, because of our government's actions.

Everything is for the best, in this best of all possible worlds.

I see that even a little Voltaire fails me. But then, I keep forgetting that it's all Bill Clinton, the democrats, and those pesky liberals' fault. You can see why, because I of course support those clowns unequivocally.

And I forget, too, that it's all the destruction of morality caused by people like me, whose teaching students is directly entirely towards ruining them. Why, Bill Bennett e-mailed me the other day, on his way to Casino Morongo, that if I'd just teach, "Readings From the Book of Morals," all would be well. You can check the texts--they'll be in the new books by their REAL authors, Stephen Ambrose and Doris Kearns Goodwin.


----------



## Ender (Sep 26, 2003)

First off...the market rises and falls all the time. what you have to look at is long term trends and the enviroment for growth. many leading economists credit Bush for slowing the ression with tax cuts. If you look at any economics textbook, you'll see that tax cuts are one of the tools used in fighting recessions. we can go into the reasons if you like.

Second, Business, the economy and working are not about "feeling good". it's about providing products and services,and being able to provide them for a monetary reward. no where is anyone guaranteed "feeling good".

now on education, isn't it funny how Calif spends in the top 7 on education,in terms of dollars. yet it's students are ranked 49th out of 50? The way to solve these issue is to get the government out of education. our country did way better education-wise when government interference was less. now there are 11 support people for every teacher. talk about top heavy.

and yes, had Clinton taken care of Bin Laden as he should have instead of playing with cigars, there would have been no 9/11, and no need to go to Afghanistan or Iraq.


----------



## Ender (Sep 26, 2003)

peace , love, and pharmecutical grade drugs...*G


----------



## rmcrobertson (Sep 26, 2003)

I see. So Clinton's policies had nothing to do with the economic boom, because Reagan set the table for that; and the doddering present economy has nothing to do with Bush's policy, because Clinton set the stage for that; and anyway, the market just goes up and down, and nobody's responsible for that, unless they're a Democrat. Beautiful.

The essential problem is that you're treating the economy like a force of nature that human beings did not create, and which is not in their control. And you're putting the economic before people, perfectly appropriately, because that is precisely what capitalist theory says to do anyway.

Problem is, many of our current difficulties go all the way back to Reagan and to tax-cutting policies; for example, California used to have one of the two best public education systems in the country (the other was that other wacko liberal hotbed, New York)--until, of course Howard Jarvis and the so-called, "tax-payers' revolt," slashed school funding. Now--guess what?

Oh well.


----------



## Ender (Sep 26, 2003)

ok..whar specific policy of Clinton led to the boom?


----------



## rmcrobertson (Sep 27, 2003)

OK--what specific policy of Bush's is gonna save the economy?


----------



## Ender (Sep 27, 2003)

*l...so ya got nuthin huh?...figured as much.

well if you want a lesson on basic economics I can give ya one.


----------



## cali_tkdbruin (Sep 27, 2003)

> _Originally posted by Ender _
> *Yes you are confused..*L
> *



First, I don't know if you're live in California, I can't tell. 
However, if you are a resident of the _Golden State_, and if you are unbiased, you'd realize that many of the problems that are attributed to the Gov. Gray Davis administration have their origins with former Gov. Pete Wilson's administration. (see our energy crisis and deregulation, etc...).

This recall election is wrong and it's a sham. We, Californians voted Davis in, he hasn't committed nor been convicted of any crime. He hasn't cheated on his taxes or cheated on his wife as far as I know. He should  just be allowed to finish out his term, and next time around vote in your Republican candidate.   

If you want Gov. Arnold, Ariana or anybody else wait 'till the next real election. 

Do it the right way.


----------



## rmcrobertson (Sep 28, 2003)

Actually, no, no lesson in basic economics is needed. I read a bit of Ricardo, Adam Smith (the first one) and above all Marx and "The Wall Street Journal:" they understand how it works. 

Since you've chosen to be condescending, let me ask: do you? Have you read any of this stuff? Watched, "The Nightly Business Report?" Listened to, say,  Sir James Goldsmith explain how money and markets work?

Do you understand that fundamentally, capitalism as a system has no involvement whatsoever in individual lives or indeed in morality in any form? Do you get that in capitalism, the ebb and flow of capital comes first, and any effect on individuals/moral choice is epiphenomenal, a side effect/one of the sequelae of the production, accumulation, and exchange of wealth in all its forms? Do you understand that our dominant method of determining who gets what and to what extent is generally held to match a Darwininst competitiveness, "nature red in tooth and claw," which (or so one would think) must raise an issue or two for fundamentalist Christians who embrace capital and reject evolution?

Call me wacky, bleeding-heart liberal, old-fashioned (that's the most recent ideology: if you object to the idea that money is the be-all and end-all of existence, you've objected to the march of progress)--I think people are more important than what H.L. Mencken called, "the Almighty Dollar." 

Oooh. My bad. Of course, in martial arts there's no reason to think that capital has IN ANY WAY affected the heart of the art. Certainly not in kenpo. Why, if that were true, these forums would be full of people kvetching about teaching kids for money alone. There'd be all sorts of comment on how test fees climb...on how people study the way they study othe yuppie fads...good thing that hasn't happened.


----------



## arnisador (Oct 4, 2003)

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=514&e=3&u=/ap/20031004/ap_on_el_gu/davis_recall_1032

Sexual harassment allegations, allegations that he spoke praisingly of Adolf Hitler--and still his numbers go up!He's the new teflon candidate.


----------

