California Special Election May 19 (office, money, teach)

[sav858]

Originally Posted by Lovehound

^I guess the difference between you and me is that you think the politicians won't override whatever they want when it's time to get more money to spend/waste.

And you think that you can teach an old dog new tricks apparently by sending them a "message". They just got more money from us w/o these props but apparently voting NO this time around will change that. I'm still curious to why you think that these politicians will magically get whatever "message" you think you're sending them by voting NO and actually doing anything differently.

I think a cap and increased rainy day fund is better than not having one at all.

[dcashley]

Originally Posted by sav858

And you think that you can teach an old dog new tricks apparently by sending them a "message". They just got more money from us w/o these props but apparently voting NO this time around will change that. I'm still curious to why you think that these politicians will magically get whatever "message" you think you're sending them by voting NO and actually doing anything differently.

I think a cap and increased rainy day fund is better than not having one at all.

Not if it is just a smoke screen. ... it is far better to be honest and resist anything these money suckers do until they decide to do the right thing.

VOTE NO!!

[sav858]

Originally Posted by dcashley

Not if it is just a smoke screen. ... it is far better to be honest and resist anything these money suckers do until they decide to do the right thing.

VOTE NO!!

Keep hanging onto that hope.......

[dcashley]

Originally Posted by sav858

Keep hanging onto that hope.......

There are four organizations that are pushing to call a California constitutional convention: One is the several chambers of commerce in the Los Angeles area. One is the Bay Area Council. There are some others, but I can't remember who right off the top of my head. Interestingly on March 13, the governator said, ""I think that eventually the state of California has to look at a constitutional convention, to really look at the whole thing, the way government works in California,"

Even the politicians know that the government is screwed up.

The initiatives on the ballot are ALL of the type: you give me money and I give you promises. This is bad business. This is bad government. This is just plain bad.

VOTE NO!

[Lovehound]

That's an interesting post dcashley because it supports my post here:

My local ABC television network affiliate KABC-7 Los Angeles just reported that if the measures fail the likely result would be that the state government would be forced into further drastic budget cuts.

Give it to me baby! I want drastic cuts in the state budget!

Our state government is too big. The only way to soothe the savage beast is to cut off its oxygen.

[sav858]

Originally Posted by dcashley

There are four organizations that are pushing to call a California constitutional convention: One is the several chambers of commerce in the Los Angeles area. One is the Bay Area Council. There are some others, but I can't remember who right off the top of my head. Interestingly on March 13, the governator said, ""I think that eventually the state of California has to look at a constitutional convention, to really look at the whole thing, the way government works in California,"

Even the politicians know that the government is screwed up.

The initiatives on the ballot are ALL of the type: you give me money and I give you promises. This is bad business. This is bad government. This is just plain bad.

VOTE NO!

I've heard about this too and think its a good idea, at least in theory. Just hope they don't end up screwing it up and putting CA in an even worse position than before.

[dcashley]

Originally Posted by Lovehound

The only way to soothe the savage beast is to cut off its oxygen.

We need to KILL the beast. (I am not proposing "killing" government. I AM proposing that we live within our means. Stop the "tax and spend" mentality. and get back to basics--to what is really important.)

We do not need kindergarden teachers that get paid $89,000 a year.
we do not need 50% of our university system payroll being consumed by non-teachers/professors.
we do not need 476 different governmental agencies providing water.
we do not need child protective laws that require so much paperwork that social workers must work 20 to 30 hours a week of paid overtime.
we do not need to have governmental services in multiple languages (except for police and fire.)
we do not need to have HUNDREDS of languages supported as ESL in the Los Angeles school system.
we do not need ... well you get the idea.

VOTE NO!!!

[northbayeric]

I am certainly planning to vote NO on 1A, B, C, D, and E. I'm not clear, though, why I should vote No on 1F, if 1F deprives our legislators of additional pay raises until they balance the budget. Is it because they would try to raise our taxes even higher rather than cut our runaway state spending?

As someone who lives not too far from San Francisco, I am infuriated nearly beyond words at the way the California Teachers Association keeps crying poormouth while at the same time engaging in saturation-bombing Hot Talk 560 KSFO with radio advertisements (and probably a whole lot of other conservative talk radio stations). Does the CTA really think that they're going to find any sympathetic listeners at Hot Talk 560 KSFO? This has been going on for months now! If they and the California government education system are so broke, where are they getting the money for this much radio airtime?

So I'm not only voting No on 1B, but a Big Fat Hell No!

[OC Investor2]

Originally Posted by northbayeric

I am certainly planning to vote NO on 1A, B, C, D, and E. I'm not clear, though, why I should vote No on 1F, if 1F deprives our legislators of additional pay raises until they balance the budget. Is it because they would try to raise our taxes even higher rather than cut our runaway state spending?

As someone who lives not too far from San Francisco, I am infuriated nearly beyond words at the way the California Teachers Association keeps crying poormouth while at the same time engaging in saturation-bombing Hot Talk 560 KSFO with radio advertisements (and probably a whole lot of other conservative talk radio stations). Does the CTA really think that they're going to find any sympathetic listeners at Hot Talk 560 KSFO? This has been going on for months now! If they and the California government education system are so broke, where are they getting the money for this much radio airtime?

So I'm not only voting No on 1B, but a Big Fat Hell No!

SHHHHH!!

Please!! Don't let them know they are pissing away their political funds on ineffective ads.

Other wise they might shift the spending to an outlet that reaches undecideds and actually be effective convincing some of those bay area mush heads it's needed "for the children".

[elousv]

Originally Posted by northbayeric

I am certainly planning to vote NO on 1A, B, C, D, and E. I'm not clear, though, why I should vote No on 1F

Couple reasons. First, the entire sham package was crafted by the upper echelons of pigs in the "nightmare" team, so we should hand it back to them as such. Second, it would be a feather in the cap of the putrid slime Maldonado and should therefore be rejected.