Comments on: Arnold “Line Item Vetos” State Parks Funding – UPDATED

By: Triumph

Triumph — Fri, 31 Jul 2009 03:12:58 +0000

John, I don’t know if I agree with your sentiment (intended or not in your sarcasm) that oil companies are as bad as JFK’s assassins and the Al Qaeda network, and that a corrupting agenda by the oil lobby to get off shore drilling in California is as bad as the assassination of JFK and the 9/11 attacks. But I will admit to being paranoid over the oil lobby’s power and their ability to buy politicians, and allowing that paranoia to keep me from voting for off shore drilling. I’d rather make cuts to law enforcement first, by way of omitting some useless laws. Sorry you disagree, but I enjoy your sarcasm and find it entertaining.

By: John Moore

John Moore — Fri, 31 Jul 2009 00:37:24 +0000

Celeste, sometimes I agree that maybe we should just drill, drill, drill. But I still have this unwavering suspicion that the oil companies, and a stooge governor of theirs like Arnold, helped create this financial crisis (and set it up in a way to where Democrats would be blamed) to make drilling seem like an only option.

That is sheer genius – of the paranoid variety. Are you also a 9-11′er? Did Bambi killed JFK?

By: Triumph

Triumph — Thu, 30 Jul 2009 21:43:38 +0000

Celeste, sometimes I agree that maybe we should just drill, drill, drill. But I still have this unwavering suspicion that the oil companies, and a stooge governor of theirs like Arnold, helped create this financial crisis (and set it up in a way to where Democrats would be blamed) to make drilling seem like an only option. I’m not ready to cave in just yet. I know it’s ideological considering the political climate and what’s really possible, but let’s look into ways of cutting prison spending first. Legalizing marijuana would be a start, to not only cut prison funding but also tax the sales of it. I would rather create a couple of Vegas style party towns, where anything goes, in desolate parts of the state, before we resort to drilling. Aside from the environmental disaster drilling would be, the worst part of it is that it sets us back that much further from exploring alternative fuel options. I get your point that people who drive gas guzzlers while being against drilling are hypocrites, but most of these people would buy hybrids if there were more available at a better price. A lot of people can only afford old clunkers. If you need a car, and there’s a hybrid being sold for 15k, whatever, and a 95 dodge pickup v8 for 2 grand, and you’re just looking for a car to get to and fro work, what are you getting? A lot of people can’t afford not to be hypocrites. So I don’t think that’s a logical response to the ‘don’t drill’ argument. In fact, it serves as more of a red herring to benefit pro drilling argument.

By: John Moore

John Moore — Thu, 30 Jul 2009 16:29:38 +0000

Well, Mavis, that welfare is the tip of the iceberg for its recipients. For example, those on welfare are going to also be on Medicaid, thus costing lots of health care dollars. They are also more likely to just show up uninsured entirely and get their routine care from emergency rooms, even though they qualify from medicare. They are also likely to be getting public aid through other various programs not included in welfare.

And no, I don’t hate welfare. It is probably a necessary safety net (I don’t think the charities have the money to do it). But welfare is a sign of trouble.

If a few people are on welfare – fine – they are likely those who are genuinely unable to take care of themselves due to disability or mental illness. If a lot of people are on welfare, it is because they are participating in a defective culture, often enabled by lefty programs.

By: Mavis Beacon

Mavis Beacon — Thu, 30 Jul 2009 07:01:25 +0000

John, from what I can tell eliminating all welfare in Californa (something that was under consideration at some point) and becoming the only state without welfare benefits would save the state only a modest fraction of the 25 billion deficit. Welfare benefits are a very small fraction of the overall budget. I know you guys hate welfare and anti-poverty programs, but that’s just not why we’re in this mess.

By: John Moore

John Moore — Thu, 30 Jul 2009 03:23:25 +0000

Hey Celeste – you might want to set your blog style sheet slightly differently, so that links are visible. In my previous post, “Coyote Blog’s” is a clickable link, but it’s almost impossible to tell.

John

By: John Moore

John Moore — Thu, 30 Jul 2009 03:22:26 +0000

I just spotted a posting that should give a clue to the bad choices California is making that cause its budget problems. Check out Coyote Blog's graph. It's amazing.

By: John Moore

John Moore — Thu, 30 Jul 2009 03:06:57 +0000

Mavis, maybe I’d have a bit more outrage if Obama and his goons in the Congress weren’t trying to kill me by depriving me of health care in my (rapidly approaching) old age.

By: Mavis Beacon

Mavis Beacon — Thu, 30 Jul 2009 00:43:38 +0000

Obviously the governor and I have different priorities, but I recognize how unbelievably difficult it is to balance the budget right now. People, especially out of staters, love to offer big prescriptions – cut spending or raise revenue without actually examining who those policies will hurt. If you’ve got some free time (Woody, that means you) spend a little time with this state budget balancer from the LA Times: http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-statebudget-fl,0,95571.htmlstory

Also, just for your own amusement, keep track of how many lawsuits this will earn you. Remember, when you’re struggling, you make like Ahnold and can cut health insurance for children!

By: John Moore

John Moore — Wed, 29 Jul 2009 20:28:26 +0000

The Governor has chosen to spend $1 billion in the next five years on a dysfunctional death penalty that serves no one, while abandoning the children of this state to abuse, neglect and illness.

It’s always a matter of opinion, Celeste. I doubt the Governor has any mal-intent towards the children.