Skip to main content

Yes, it's true, our greenwashed governor isn't even waiting until after November to demonstrate that his "green" photo op in August was first and foremost a campaign event.

CA Assembly Speaker Fabian Núñez, sponsor of the global warming bill that Schwarzenegger signed to international fanfare, appears to be shocked by the governor's George-Bush-like behavior. He told the SF Chronicle:

"You can't rewrite a law through executive order.... This is totally inconsistent with the intent of the law and with the way that it is written."

Ummm, yeah. Speaker Núñez, that used to be true; perhaps you weren't aware of the Bush administration's record of using "signing statements" to disregard laws they don't like, but don't want to veto for political reasons? Too bad you didn't figure out the truth about Schwarzenegger's continuing agenda to consolidate power in the Executive Branch before you helped him take a big lead in this election back in August by giving his handlers the "truthiness" they needed to portray him as "green" and "bipartisan."

more from "Núñez slams governor on emission law" below the fold.

Assembly Speaker Fabian Núñez and some environmental groups charged Monday that an executive order Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger plans to sign today undermines an agreement the governor struck with Democrats on the state's landmark global warming law.

Schwarzenegger will sign an order giving the secretary of the Environmental Protection Agency the duty of overseeing parts of the law's implementation and emphasizes the development of a new market allowing companies to buy and sell greenhouse gas emissions credits.

Núñez said that the executive order gives more power to the executive branch than the law calls for and that the governor's emphasis on a market-based approach to lowering greenhouse gas emissions ignored other aspects of the law. He suggested the governor was reinterpreting the law based on proposals he had suggested to lawmakers during negotiations over the legislation this year but that had been rejected by the Legislature.

Me, I figure most of the high-ID commenters here on dKos babbling on about how they're gonna vote for Schwarzenegger because he's "green" and because Phil Angelides is "a nobody" and "all about big development" aren't sincere. Some of them sound bitchy enough to be one of Bill Bradley's (Schwarzenegger's "favorite" Democrat, just like Lieberman) sock puppets, and some of them are probably the result of the Schwarzenegger campaign's 24/7 monitoring of the Internet.

But I'm sure plenty of voters are sincere in their "you know, you just gotta like the guy" comments -- after all apparently plenty of Americans who now hate and despise George W. Bush were fooled into voting for him in 2004  because, "you know, you feel like you wanna sit down and have a beer with the guy."

And the similiarities -- the fake populism, the Big Lies, the Big Money donors, the attacking and coopting the opponent on their strength strategies (nobody's done more for CalPERS divestment from companies doing business in the Sudan than Phil Angelides) -- are no surprise, because it's the same damned "power team" that sold the American people a bill of goods in 2004.

Schwarzenegger campaign manager Steve Schmidt  is known as "Karl Rove's lieutenant," he's a White House aide to Dick Cheney, and ran George W. Bush's reelection "war room" in 2004. He was also "point man" for Bush on Judge Alito's nomination to the Supreme Court

Then there's Communications Director Adam Mendelsohn, from DCI Group, elite GOP lobbyists who do global warming denial for EXXON and "tobacco doesn't cause cancer" work for JR Reynolds. In the PR world, they're particularly known for setting up fake, bought-and-paid-for citizens groups to undermine workplace smoking bans in the name of "Citizens for Freedom to Smoke" or whatever. via astroturf letters to the editor and press conferences, etc. (I suspect it was Mendelsohn's idea to pay off "progressive" SF minister Rev. Amos Brown, a former fierce critics of Schwarzenegger who's now making radio ads for him. Sure the Rev. has only made $16,000+ so far, but who's to say how much more $8,000 a month plus "expenses" work as a "political consultant" is coming?)

Matthew Dowd, Schwarzenegger's "chief campaign strategist" is another "top White House veteran" who was the "lead architect of the Bush-Cheney 2004 campaign".

I mean, folks, don't you get it yet?

George W. Bush is dead in the water, politically. IMO, this fake "green," fake "bipartisan" and bought-and-paid-for campaign in California is a trial run for the political strategy for whichever "New!" "Modern!" "Green!" "not-George-Bush!" Republican candidate runs for President in 2008, whether it's Schwarzenegger or not. (yes, I know about the Constitutional obstacle, but if this Austrian-born weightlifter gets elected again to CA governor, one of the most important political positions in the world, not just the country, expect to hear the same kind of talk about changing the Constitution that we heard after Schwarzenegger won the recall election.) And sure, having a celebrity like Schwarzenegger as a candidate makes it easier, but techniques and lessons learned in CA 2006 will be useful no matter who the "anti-George-Bush" GOP candidate is in 2008.

Schwarzenegger is a George Bush Republican, in that he puts Big Money interests first, whether the policies those Big Money interests want are good for everyday people or good for the country as a whole.

Don't miss this video, "I have plenty of money," which contrasts Schwarzenegger's public statements during the recall election about how "special interest contributions come in, and special favors go out" with his actual record of signing bills favorable to his big donors. An interviewer gets him boxed into a corner with her repeated queries about how he has broken his pledges not to take special interest money and he finally replies with the truth: "What's wrong with that?"

Usually, the CA gov diaries here at dKos disappear into the great unread, but I'm hoping this one -- written on my birthday, thank you very much, and no I won't be doing politics all day -- will be different. Big Money Democrats and the big bloggers may have abandoned the field in California, but I'll be damned if I'm going to shut up and stop fighting the powers that be, whether they come wrapped in greenwashing and expensive celebrity suits or not.

Originally posted to jennifer poole on Tue Oct 17, 2006 at 12:20 PM PDT.

Poll

Why are you voting for Phil Angelides?

16%89 votes
4%24 votes
2%16 votes
0%1 votes
3%20 votes
0%5 votes
1%6 votes
4%26 votes
0%3 votes
65%357 votes

| 547 votes | Vote | Results

EMAIL TO A FRIEND X
Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags

?

More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  Well (9+ / 0-)

    This is one of the few let-downs for Democrats this cycle. It sadens me that Arnold is probably headed for a relatively comfortable re-election.

    http://www.keen.com/jiacinto For DC related travel advice, please visit that link.

    by jiacinto on Tue Oct 17, 2006 at 12:25:07 PM PDT

  •  according to polls (27+ / 0-)

    angelides is getting only 60% of the dem votes! people need to wake the fuck up! schwarzenegger is still the same belligerent egomaniac who thinks nurses and firefighters are special interests, that making crude jokes about democrats is cute and charming, and that george bush deserved re-election! he's been playing bipartisan during this election year, but it's just a political ploy! this proves it! thanks for the diary!

    © 2006 "The work goes on, the cause endures, the hope still lives, and the dream will never die." -Sen. Edward M. Kennedy, 12 August 1980

    by Laurence Lewis on Tue Oct 17, 2006 at 12:28:44 PM PDT

    •  Those dems know exactly who Arnold is (4+ / 0-)

      They just don't care.

      •  i disagree (13+ / 0-)

        schwarzenegger held very public signing ceremonies on some popular bills- like on global warming. some top dems appeared with him, but they've since gotten a clue and stood back. in a democratic state, he's worked very hard to appear bipartisan! a lot of people have been fooled! the experts say angelides needs 70% of the dem vote. if something could happen in the next three weeks to open people's eyes, that 10% is actually plausible.

        © 2006 "The work goes on, the cause endures, the hope still lives, and the dream will never die." -Sen. Edward M. Kennedy, 12 August 1980

        by Laurence Lewis on Tue Oct 17, 2006 at 12:39:24 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Some top Dems have stood back ... (18+ / 0-)

          ...but they haven't stood four-square with Angelides. As for Hollywood's support in the governor's race, Steven Spielberg, et al., can go screw themselves.

          •  part of that (6+ / 0-)

            is backlash from the ugly primary. markos was dead on when he kept decrying the tone. and i completely agree about the turncoat hollywood "liberals"- personality over principle!

            © 2006 "The work goes on, the cause endures, the hope still lives, and the dream will never die." -Sen. Edward M. Kennedy, 12 August 1980

            by Laurence Lewis on Tue Oct 17, 2006 at 12:56:31 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  Markos was right about ... (12+ / 0-)

              ...the tone of the primary. But the primary was June 6. After other primaries, we Democrats lined up behind the winners, even those winners whose views some of us have very great difficulties with - Bob Casey and Harold Ford being two. So why doesn't the Democratic candidate for governor of the state with the largest population in the country rate the same support? I'm not a big fan of the way the Angelides campaign has been run, but every Democrat with clout who doesn't speak out in favor of Angelides is giving comfort and votes to the two-faced Arnold Schwarzenegger - with his plans for reshaping California politics to favor more Republicans. Unconscionable.

              •  i agree (5+ / 0-)

                and i don't understand- both the legislative leaders and the chair of the party have failed us miserably. given schwarzenegger's unpopularity, just a year ago, this should have been an easy win. i'm particularly pissed at the legislators who allowed schwarzenegger to get away with his "bipartisan" act!

                © 2006 "The work goes on, the cause endures, the hope still lives, and the dream will never die." -Sen. Edward M. Kennedy, 12 August 1980

                by Laurence Lewis on Tue Oct 17, 2006 at 01:13:21 PM PDT

                [ Parent ]

              •  why? (2+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                Turkana, yoduuuh do or do not

                because phil is an actual liberal, and democratic loyalty only goes one way, same as the money: from liberals to conservatives (who call themselves moderates).

                they're happier with a republican than a liberal as guv.

                surf putah, your friendly neighborhood central valley samizdat

                by wu ming on Tue Oct 17, 2006 at 02:20:11 PM PDT

                [ Parent ]

                  •  but i think it's a point worth lingering on (4+ / 0-)

                    because it gets to the heart of what we often end up doing when we're being partisan loyalists for the good of the party, namely being played for suckers IMO.

                    progressive money and effort is being channeled to centrists while the same centrists are playing factional games, denying or undercutting progressive candidates. the result is likely going to be a more rightward-tilting democratic party, and a better chance for people like hoyer and emmanuel and reid and other centrists to snag leadership positions and set the party direction ever rightward.

                    which is the very irritant that got a lot of the people here into blogging and the dean campaign in the first place.

                    phil should be a no-brainer for a pragmatic, partisan type strategy. the fact that he's been cut loose suggests that they're more than willing to throw a race in order to keep control of the democratic party, and that our collective decision to have made our peace with the establishment without first having reformed it as early as we did has been a colossal tactical mistake for the left, if a boon for the same DLC and blue dogs that we used to rail about.

                    not that i assume that you disagree, mind you, just that i thought the point could benefit from being made plainly.

                    surf putah, your friendly neighborhood central valley samizdat

                    by wu ming on Tue Oct 17, 2006 at 04:51:21 PM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

                    •  You're right. I don't disagree with ... (2+ / 0-)
                      Recommended by:
                      jennifer poole, wu ming

                      ...you. But, at least in some cases, more centrist Dems were inevitable if there was any hope of capturing purplish-reddish districts. Liberal Dems could not have won.

                      But, not to in any way denigrate the hard work that many people reading this blog have put in, this election is, to a great extent, being dropped in the Democrats' laps. That there even ARE candidates in some districts to take advantage of this is a testament to the 50-state strategy. Some of those didn't-have-a-chance-two-months-ago candidates are centrist, some are not. So, imo, we should all be pulling for more of those 2nd and 3rd tier Dems to win because that will keep the party from drifting further to the right.

                      As I've said all along - I know many disagree - first get a Dem majority, then those of us on the left of the party can work to persuade that majority to move in a direction we'd like to see. As long as Dems remain in the minority, all any of us can do is fight rear-guard actions against torture, dismantling the Constitution, et cetera.

                      There is, of course, always the chance that the centrist and conservative Dems will stab us in the back, or try to. I am sure if the Dems win a majority, they will cast votes in the next two years that will make me scream and tear my hair. But that has been the case my whole life. The alternatives are disengaging entirely from electoral politics or working for a third party whose chances are less than slim. I know that both of those approaches are popular among some people whose other views I'm in close agreement with. However, I think disengagement in the hopes the Dems will implode and something new will rise from the ashes is a gigantic mistake.

                      •  i generally agree (3+ / 0-)

                        although not on the order of winning elections and then moving the party in the right direction. if anything, those two need to be reversed to be effective, but at any rate ought to be taken as inseparable parts of the same action, ie. working for good democrats and letting the centrists fund their own candidates. i am tactically for working to redirect this party rather than starting from scratch (although i have progressively less and less confidence that the dems will not drive themselves into the ground regardless, even in victory), but that does not necessarily entail devoting one's energies to helping out centrist democrats win elections.

                        definitely agreed on the 2nd and 3rd tier candidates. a narrow win may very well leave us with a less responsive and more eager to sell out democratic party, but a blowout stands to bring in a lot of folks with less loyalty to emmanuel and hoyer (the senate, as far as i can tell, will be hopeless for several more election cycles), and potentially the chance for some actual change within the party.

                        my point was mostly to remind folks that the same dem establishment that is hanging out angelides to dry and sniping at him in the media are the ones who urge us to help them out with time, money and our silence when they sell us out with votes and rhetoric. while i'm currently in on the whole popular front tactic, i think it is extremely counterproductive to pretend like the centrists aren't intentionally trying to blunt and dissipate the energy of the challenge of the dean campaign and its successsor in the rise of the blogs.

                        in short, i think we lost our way in the summer of '04, and am concerned that we may reap the consequences of trusting the establishment before reforming it in this coming election. lieberman's challenge should have been only one of many this cycle IMO.

                        surf putah, your friendly neighborhood central valley samizdat

                        by wu ming on Tue Oct 17, 2006 at 07:20:27 PM PDT

                        [ Parent ]

            •  anybody who gets his advice on who to vote for (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              Snakes on a White House

              from the entertainment industry deserves the kind of government that will result.

              Looking for intelligent energy policy alternatives? Try here.

              by alizard on Tue Oct 17, 2006 at 03:51:31 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

          •  Schwarzenegger is a (10+ / 0-)

            big, fat, fucking LIAR.

            And Villaraigosa is an opportunistic Politician-with-a-capital-"P" and that rhymes with "T," and that stands for Tool.

            As nightfall does not come all at once, neither does oppression. - Justice William O. Douglas

            by occams hatchet on Tue Oct 17, 2006 at 01:05:25 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  Villaraigosa is my mayor ... (8+ / 0-)

              ...and I would vote for him again. But, on this issue, let me just say that I am beyond disappointed. Villaraigosa certainly wants the governor's seat come 2011, so there's obviously some calculation going on regarding that. But there's a difference between "working with the governor" and playing footsie with him, as the mayor has done with Arnie, and which, despite his tepid endorsement of Angelides, he is still doing. At what cost to Californians?

              •  I voted for him enthusiastically (3+ / 0-)

                but now I'm considerably jaded. This whole dog-and-pony show with the LAUSD was a political ploy as cynical as they come - confirmed by Villaraigosa's stall on endorsing Angelides, coupled with his cozying up to Schwarzenegger. Villaraigosa has no business screwing with LAUSD (aside from its being unconstitutional); the whole thing was a no-lose political stunt. I call total bullshit on it. I had expected much better, more substantive governance from Villaraigosa.

                No question about it, he is headed for bigger things. But, as you say, at what cost to those who elected him, not to run for higher office, but to do the job he was elected to?

                As nightfall does not come all at once, neither does oppression. - Justice William O. Douglas

                by occams hatchet on Tue Oct 17, 2006 at 01:17:41 PM PDT

                [ Parent ]

              •  interesting speculation at Political Muscle (2+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                Meteor Blades, martini

                the other day -- total speculation, but:

                A lot of people around town think Arnold Schwarzenegger wants to run for mayor of Los Angeles, trading jobs with Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa. This is pure speculation of course, but it keeps getting repeated and passed around.

                http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/...

                •  my fear (2+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  Meteor Blades, Dave925

                  is that he has his eyes on a senate seat. when either boxer or feinstein retires, we'll have plenty of good candidates, but the cult of personality and the hollywood sell-outs (as mb notes, above) will make it difficult. if we can just get that extra 10% of the dem vote, we can be rid of scwarzenegger, now!

                  © 2006 "The work goes on, the cause endures, the hope still lives, and the dream will never die." -Sen. Edward M. Kennedy, 12 August 1980

                  by Laurence Lewis on Tue Oct 17, 2006 at 03:53:15 PM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

              •  I wouldn't (0+ / 0-)

                He's my mayor too and I wouldn't vote for him again. We don't need to - we have an abundance of Democrats.

              •  Villaraigosa won't get my vote next election. (1+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                jennifer poole

                He came in like a lion and he's governing like a weasel. I regret having voted for the little putz. And if he wants my vote for him for Governor, he has another thing coming. I voted for a Democrat. He's behaving more like a little Dubya. I'm glad that LAUSD is hanging tough now and refusing to be bullied by him.

                He's a Douche. Him and Ah-nuld are great for each other. Maybe they'll have strategy sessions at Hooters.

                PBJ Diddy, on the Foley scandal: "This is NOT 'Goody Proctor caused my crops to wither,' this is 'GOP sicko showed me his withered ding-dong.'"

                by Snakes on a White House on Tue Oct 17, 2006 at 09:23:10 PM PDT

                [ Parent ]

      •  I disagree, too (4+ / 0-)

        My husband is one of those Dems who's considering voting for Arnold. The reason? -  he HATES Angelides. His campaign has been HORRIBLE. He's a terrible candidate who's done a pathetic job getting his message out there. He's petulant and whiny sounding - everything Dems want to avoid this voting season.

        Arnold, on the other hand, has done a great job making himself SEEM reasonable and moderate.

        I'm NOT saying these things are true (though I do think that Angelides was a very unfortunate selection) but as newcomers to CA, Arnold can be persuasive.

        Rest assured, I'll be sending my husband this diary to persuade him to vote for Angelides, even if it feels icky. He'll step-up once given the facts, bbut it may be that I can only prevent a vote for Arnold. Nevermind that it's the Angelides campaign that should be getting this info out there? So disappointing!

    •  Dems are starting to come home... (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      jennifer poole, Turkana, keikekaze
  •  Life really is high school with money (19+ / 0-)

    and everyone's voting for the jock who was also the dramatic lead instead of the nerdy student government guy.  Dammit all to hell.

    Honest, I'm having talks with as many people as I can to get them to vote for the wonk instead of the jock.

    Chaos, fear, dread. My work here is done.

    by madhaus on Tue Oct 17, 2006 at 12:29:18 PM PDT

  •  special bonus tip jar (19+ / 0-)

    with "adults only" warning. (you do have to scroll down to get the full obscenity)

    Radar Mag's exclusive: "Arnold gives the old grip and grin" photo of the sex-obsessed weight-lifter from, what, 20 years ago? It's not exactly group sex, but it is a group and it is a sexual act. At least the guy in front has the grace to look embarassed, but Schwarzenegger is just grinning the same old crocodile grin.

  •  Recommended, but (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    greenearth

    I'm not sure the ad hominems against kossacks are necessarily warranted.  I've never seen a kossack say anything positve about Arnold.  Then again, I don't visit CA diaries with much regularity.  Just sayin'.

    "... Just so long as I'm the dictator." - GWB, 12/18/00

    by Bob Love on Tue Oct 17, 2006 at 12:30:33 PM PDT

  •  Greed and selfishness (0+ / 0-)

    are the reasons CA dems are voting for corrupt Arnold.  It is what it is.

    •  if you mean rank and file Democrats (0+ / 0-)

      I'd have to say that it's because Angelides, for whatever reason (presumably, as in GOP-friendly media) hasn't gotten his message out.

      Speaking as a moderately well-informed Californian, I am not sure what his message is other than "I'm not Arnie".

      For me, that's reason enough to vote for him. But this still needs to be sold to the rest of California Democrats before election day.

      Looking for intelligent energy policy alternatives? Try here.

      by alizard on Tue Oct 17, 2006 at 03:58:00 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  *shaking my head* (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    auxiliarykitty

    Not voting for Ahnold anymore having read that...but still not voting for shrew-boy Angelides.

    It's now official, I dislike both.

    •  Rubber-stamp voter (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Dave925, trashablanca, sdoyle

      thanks for nothin.

      •  Rubber stamp? (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        gname, Heart of the Rockies, noneya

        Sorry refuse to vote for Gray Davis the sequel either. Also refuse to vote for someone who supports prop 86, has a crappy environmental record going back to his days as a developer, and let's not even go into the fact that when he talks to me as a Californian he acts like I am a moron.

        Too bad Westly didn't win, and no I won't just vote for Phil because he has a D near his name.

        •  Yep. (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Smallbottle, trashablanca

          As I said below.

          Don't vote for one or the other, then you are rubber stamping everything the winner does.

          •  *shrugs* (0+ / 0-)

            Oh well. In this case if it's Arnold, it's Arnold. Can't support a candidate like Angelides for my reasons in response to below.

            Guess I am supposed to hold my nose and not have a conscience?

            •  No (3+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              The Gryffin, trashablanca, keikekaze

              but you are supposed to have a longer view.

            •  Conscience? (5+ / 0-)

              Since you're a Dem, I can only assume that Angelides matches your viewpoints in a better way than Schwarzenegger does. You may think he sucks, but he sucks less than Arnold.

              What is the most practical way to get someone better than Arnold in office? To vote for someone who is better, and who has the most likely shot at winning as a challenger. Which would be Angelides.

              You are deciding that you will not try to get someone better in office, but that it is more important for you to feel good about having voted with your conscience.

              But is that the best decision, given that it will keep the worst candidate in office? What is such a decision worth, practically, aside from you feeling good about yourself?

              I do not have my own blog.

              by Frank on Tue Oct 17, 2006 at 01:06:26 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  It's been a toss up for me (1+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                gname

                Honestly, given I don't have a rabid hatred for schwarzenegger I probably could have voted for him, Angelides has not impressed me nor earned my vote. He could have the endorsement of Buddha, Allah, and Yahweh but he has to win my vote. He's not the better candidate. He hasn't shown it.

              •  And then you give the A sign to (0+ / 0-)

                that wonderful 2000 ad by Nader of the children saying they were going to vote for the lesser evil.

            •  You are supposed to HAVE a conscience . . . (5+ / 0-)

              . . . and do the right thing.  You know perfectly well what that is.  It is to helpget rid of the Bush-clone clown-Governor Grabass, that stinking, suppurating scab on what is otherwise a great state, by voting for whomever you have to vote for to do it.  Now go do it, and I don't want to hear any more whining about it!

              •  Ok besides (1+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                gname

                campaigning with bush once during 04 I haven't seen much, until this, that could actually hold water as saying Arnold is bush. I actually find the commercial trying to link him to bush funny.

                But not gonna defend Arnold. Angelides hasn't earned my vote and being a Dem is not the de-facto be all end all that would get it.

        •  You're just talking GOP talking points (7+ / 0-)

          He has a great Environmental record, the developer slam is false, and I don't get the moron talk down on those very rare occassions when the Media lets us hear Phil talk.

          DLC Westly, yeah, that would've been a fine choice.  I'm surprised he didn't try a Lieberman stunt after losing the primary!

          Yeah, and Gray Davis, he was boring and stilted and sided with the Prison Unions, and had no answer to Enron.  So vote for the hypocrite schwarzenegger, that makes sense, instead of the guy supported by Unions, Pelosi, Boxer, Feinstein, and a couple thousands other people.

          •  SF Bay Guardian endorsed Angelides (7+ / 0-)

            for Governor a couple weeks ago and they've been fighting "big developers" for 40 years.

            http://www.sfbg.com/...

            And the SFBG hasn't hesitated to endorse Greens, either, so their endorsement of Angelides should mean a lot to any sincere environmental voter.

            as they say:

            This race ought to be a lot closer than it is — and the fact that Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger is well ahead in most polls speaks to the poor quality of news media coverage that has allowed the job of governor to be all about expensive campaign commercials and misleading sound bites.

          •  Regardless of who's talking points (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            Karyn

            my opinions can be linked to I can assure you that I came to my opinions on my own.

            Now if ya want to get into it, Angelides was also treasurer during the Enron mess and during the Davis years, what exactly did he do to put a stop to that failure?

            •  You know damn well (3+ / 0-)

              there was virtually nothing either one could do given that Enron had bush and FERC in their back pocket, but I know that they tried, that they presented the argument that price gouging was going on, that the Feds had to step in because only the Federal Government can regulate interstate commerce, and to no avail until WE conserved our way to some semblance of sanity, and the non stop pressure from all sorts of people and politicians raised public awareness as the gouging spread over the west and the ramifications threatened all sorts of people.

              I'll have to see to what Phil did, I'm confident he did far more than he will get credit for from people like you who refuse to see the truth dancing in front of your face.

              I'm inclined to think you're just trolling here, but you do respond with answers, superficial as they are, yes I know I don't have details here but i will get them, but this question is starting to delve into troll territory.

              •  No need (1+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                gname

                read my post below.

                On a side note I love how people are treated for having different opinions around here. Fortunately some do answer without resorting to insults and innuendo.

                Anyway, it looks like Angelides will get my vote thanks to someone here giving me a good enough reason to vote for him without resorting to cheap shots.

                My answers to questions are my answers, belittling them rather than giving me a reason to change my mind is not helpful.

                Have a nice day.

          •  Just another swiftboat attack (2+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            Dave925, Snakes on a White House

            Just another swiftboat style attack which Angelides' campaign remains silent on hoping it'll go away.  We all know how well that strategy worked for Kerry in 2004.

    •  well, not voting for Arnold is something (4+ / 0-)

      I really appreciate you saying, Dreggas, and thanks for that birthday present! If other GOP and independent voters disgusted by Schwarzenegger's Big Money First campaign stay home -- voters like farmers who can't get enough migrant help to pick their crops this year or like traditional Republicans who heartily disapprove of "burdening our grandchildren" with the governor's expensive bonds package, or like true "family values" voters appalled at the governor's character -- we can still beat the George Bush 2004 team and get a Democrat into the governor's office.

      •  Oh I am a dem (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Heart of the Rockies, Leila

        I will be voting, there's a lot of things on the ballot both locally (propositions) and nationally (senate/house) races I care about that I am going to the polls. I have yet to miss an election of any variety however I will pass over the governor section or vote third party.

        Rubber stamp or not I have always voted my conscience, results be damned.

  •  Classic Arnold (4+ / 0-)

    "The greatest feeling you can get in a gym or the most satifying feeling you can get in the gym is the pump. Let's say you train your biceps, blood is rushing in to your muscles and that's what we call the pump. Your muscles get a really tight feeling like your skin is going to explode any minute and its really tight and its like someone is blowing air into your muscle and it just blows up and it feels different, it feels fantastic. Its as satifying to me as cumming is, you know, as in having sex with a woman and cumming. So can you believe how much I am in heaven? I am like getting the feeling of cumming in the gym, I'm getting the feeling of cumming at home, I'm getting the feeling of cumming backstage when I pump up when I pose out in front of 5000 people I get the same feeling, so I am cumming day and night. Its terrific, right? So I am in heaven."

    Lately it occurs to me, what long, strange trip its been

    by Craig Burnham on Tue Oct 17, 2006 at 12:33:38 PM PDT

  •  Rubber stamp? (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    noneya

    What because I refuse to endorse Gray Davis the Sequel?

    •  I haven't heard you say anything (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      skywriter, keikekaze

      you dislike about Angeledes except for his looks.

      And yes...if you don't choose Arnold or Angeledes, you are rubber-stamping every decision the winner makes whether you like it or not.

      •  *shrugs* (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Gruvkitty, noneya

        Call me a rubberstamp then, guess by voting strictly D even if the candidate doesn't deserve it then I could call you a lemming, I won't though.

        Ya want a break down of why Angelides will not be getting my vote here it is

        1. crappy environmental record as a land developer.
        1. typical pol with little to no personality or independence from what I have seen.
        1. supports prop 86 which is nothing more than a money grab by hospitals and insurance companies at the expense of a minority of people simply because it is easy to demonize them.
        1. He has not sold himself to me as a candidate and isn't making an attempt to save for being "not arnold". IE where's his outreach to anyone other than those who already hate Arnold?
        1. He is nothing more than a throwback to the Gray Davis era and I did support the recall.
        1. now here is the personality, notice it's not number one. He talks like I do not know what is in my own best interest and that I should be thankful big daddy Phil is there to take care of me. Typical for all politicians but especially grating in his case.

        I also would note that Angelides has had his eye on doing this ever since Gray Davis was recalled. In fact he made no secret he would run for governor right after the recall. Planning a move that early on sounds to me more like someone who was planning a power play/grab vs someone who really would be working to make California better.

        •  I see. (0+ / 0-)

          You're a smoker.

          •  Of all the reasons (0+ / 0-)

            You single that out? LOL

            Actually I used to smoke, I quit, but I'll be damned if I demonize those who still smoke by taxing them with profits from the tax not solely going for smoking cessation programs or the treatment of them.

            •  That is the only substantive one. (0+ / 0-)

              shrug

              •  You're opinion *shrugs* n/t (0+ / 0-)
                •  Psst (0+ / 0-)

                  "Your" opinion.

                  •  Yep (1+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    skywriter

                    And I proved I can change mine, obviously not gonna vote for Ahnuld anymore.

                    Now give me a reason to vote for Angelides...that makes him better since he obviously can't do it himself in his own campaign.

                    •  Angeledes endorsements: (5+ / 0-)

                      Endorsements: Environmental Leaders
                      Partial Listing as of October 16, 2006

                         * California League of Conservation Voters
                         * Clean Water Action California
                         * Sierra Club California
                         * Vote the Coast
                         * Martha Arguello, Environmental Advocate*
                         * Ed Begley, Jr.
                         * Ralph Benson, Executive Director, Sonoma Land Trust*
                         * Rachel Binah, Chair Emeritus, Environmental Caucus, California Democratic Party*
                         * Holly Bishop, Environmental Advocate*
                         * Jim Blomquist, Board Member, Smith River Alliance*
                         * Susan Boyd, Principle, CalAg, LLC*
                         * Luke Breit, Chair, Environmental Caucus, California Democratic Party*
                         * Owen Byrd, Advisory Council, Save San Francisco Bay Association*
                         * Peter Calthorpe, Founder, Congress for the New Urbanism*
                         * Ann Carlson, Co-Director, Frank G. Wells Environmental Law Clinic, UCLA School of Law*
                         * Tim Carmichael, President and Chief Executive Officer, Coalition for Clean Air*
                         * Joseph Caves, Environmental Advocate*
                         * Sarah Christie, San Luis Obispo Environmental Advocate
                         * Janet Cobb, President, California Oak Foundation*
                         * Paula Daniels, Immediate Past President, Heal the Bay*
                         * Ted Danson
                         * Laurie David, Environmental Advocate*
                         * Carla Din, Field Director, Western Region, Apollo Alliance*
                         * Michael Eaton, Former President, Environmental Council of Sacramento*
                         * Larry Fahn, Former National President, Sierra Club*
                         * Robert García, Executive Director, Center for Law in the Public Interest*
                         * Madelyn Glickfeld, Board Member, Heal the Bay*
                         * Brad Hall, Environmental Advocate
                         * Carlyle Hall, Chairman of the Board, Center for Law in the Public Interest*  
                         * Bob Hattoy, Vice President, CA Fish and Game Commission*
                         * Rod Hsiao, Chief Operating Officer, Natural Heritage Institute*
                         * Jim Jones, Former President, Save the American River*
                         * Susan Jordan, Director, California Coastal Protection Network*
                         * Larry Kaplan, Director, Los Angeles Area, The Trust for Public Land*
                         * Linda Krop, Chief Council, Environmental Defense Network*
                         * Nicole Lederer, Environmental Advocate*
                         * Marianna Leuschel, Environmental Advocate*
                         * David Lewis, Executive Director, Save the Bay*
                         * Adi Liberman, Former President, Heal the Bay*
                         * Doug Linney, President, The Next Generation*
                         * Julia Louis-Dreyfus, Environmental Advocate
                         * Joel Makower, Founder, Green Business Network/GreenBiz.com*
                         * John McCaull, Former Legislative Director, National Audubon Society –California*
                         * Craig McNamara, President-Executive Director, Center for Land Based Learning*
                         * Gerald Meral, Former Executive Director, Planning and Conservation League*
                         * Albert Meyerhoff, Environmental Advocate*
                         * Diane Meyer Simon, Founder, Global Green*
                         * Rhonda Mills, Director of Special Projects, Clean Power Campaign*
                         * David Mogavero, Former President, Environmental Council of Sacramento*
                         * Virginia Moose, Environmental Advocate*  
                         * Irma Munoz, President and Founder, Mujeres de la Tierra*
                         * Mary Nichols, Director, Institute of the Environment, UCLA*
                         * Gary Patton, Executive Director, Planning and Conservation League*
                         * Shelley Poticha, President, Reconnecting America and Former Executive Director, Congress for the New Urbanism*
                         * Erich Pfuehler, California State Director, Clean Water Action*
                         * Jill Ratner, Environmental Advocate
                         * Betsy Reifsnider, Former Executive Director, Friends of the River*
                         * Joan Reinhardt Reiss, Former Regional Director, Wilderness Society*
                         * Cruz Reynoso, Environmental Advocate
                         * Jonathan F.P. Rose, Environmental Advocate
                         * Tony Rossmann, Board Member, Planning and Conservation League*
                         * Christine Russell, Environmental Advocate
                         * Martin Schlageter, Campaign and Advocacy Director, Coalition for Clean Air*
                         * Bob Schneider, Director, Tuleyome and Cache Creek Wild*
                         * Mitchell Schwartz, Environmental Advocate
                         * Traci Sheehan Van Thull, Campaign Director, California Wildlife Heritage*
                         * Karolyn Simon, Former President, Environmental Council of Sacramento*
                         * Nancy Sutley, Former Board Member, State Water Resources Control Board*
                         * Frederick Tornatore, Chair, Sacramento Environmental Commission*
                         * Jerry Uhland, President and Chief Executive Officer, CalAg, LLC*
                         * Tom Unterman, Board President, Heal the Bay*
                         * Erik Vink, Former Regional Director, American Farmland Trust*
                         * Lee Wallach, President, Coalition on the Environment and Jewish Life of Southern California*
                         * Sara Wan, Commissioner, California Coastal Commission*

                      •  Ok That covers Environment (0+ / 0-)

                        They gave their endorsements but here is what I want to know.

                        I want to know what he is going to do for me as an individual given the following:

                        A. I am married with no children to a permanently disabled wife who is collecting federal (not state) disability.

                        B. I am not in a union, I could only hope that my line of work became unionized due to the number of times people in my line of work have lost their jobs to outsourcing (I am a software engineer).

                        C. I pay out the backside for gas because I have to use a van for my wife and her wheelchair

                        D. even on my salary I am living paycheck to paycheck because of insane rent and I have little hope of owning a home especially here in so-cal.

                        E. Not that this is more than coincidence but I began looking for a new job not long ago (beginning of this year) and had enough offers I could relax in choosing, got a nice pay raise and such as a result. Compared to when I started in my line of work (when Gray Davis was gov.) and I had to take the first thing that came along since offers were few and far between and even then had to settle for less than market because of the economy and pay scale here.

                        These are just a few things. I have to admit I am not doing TO badly all things considered, after all I am surviving if just barely. When I go to the polls and vote I take into consideration how I have done while X has been in office since if the government is running well (for the most part) then I tend to prosper a bit more.

                        Angelides has the market on the "middle class" cornered when you talk about the middle class in terms of blue collar workers and those that while not blue collar are union, especially after the special election fiasco (not the quote regarding the propositions being good ideas was taken out of context just read a transcript).

                        However where is the outreach to the other part of the middle class, the ones who are in the middle of the middle, who are getting by and have health insurance etc. who have decent but by no means great jobs and who are doing everything they can to just get by?

                        That's where I am coming from. I could go into it more but don't want to bore anyone.

                        •  What will he do, I guess, (0+ / 0-)

                          that Ahnold would not?

                          Do you think that the continued borrowing without a cut in spending is going to be a sustainable habit for California?

                          Do you wish to continue to keep school funding at levels among the lowest in the United States? Because that affects everyone, not only people with kids. Without a proper education, kids turn to crime. Then your taxes will go to prisons, not schools.

                          Part of the problem with Gray Davis were the illegal shennanegans of ENRON....that isn't going to happen again.

                          Part of the problem, I think, is that he isn't charismatic, and the BIG DEMS are not pulling for him. But I doubt that he would do much different than Wesley, in all honesty.

                          More Endorsements: Other Leaders/Advocates
                          Partial Listing as of October 16, 2006

                             * Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now (ACORN)
                             * League of Young Voters
                             * Golden State Manufactured Home Owners League
                             * National Association of Social Workers
                             * Planned Parenthood Affiliates of California (PPAC)
                             * VotersInjuredatWork.org (VIAW)
                               
                             * Henry Cisneros, Former United States Secretary of Housing and Urban Development
                             * Ferial Masry, Arab-American Civic Leader & Assembly Candidate, Ventura County

                          •  Hmmmm (0+ / 0-)

                            spending/borrowing is a problem. Of course the alternative is raising taxes which I am already paying enough of annually both in state and fed.

                            As for school funding, if the money is put to good use then yes I am for funding schools. But that money needs to be as much a club as an incentive. Letting teachers get off easy and not setting high standards with regards to linking their job to their performance (and I hate saying test scores because anyone can memorize a book and do well on a test) is important. I went to a public school in NY (am a transplant) and I am appalled to see the little tin buildings that pass for classrooms around here. But I also know that there are a lot of teachers who see themselves as protected in cushy jobs they can't lose (saw it in my own school).

                            Gray Davis was ineffectual, it wasn't just enron that brought him down.

                            As for endorsements they are all well and good but I am not affiliated with any of these. I would pull the lever for him if he gave me reason to. Voting, while something that has an impact far larger than my one vote, is still something I take personally.

                            I might get slammed for my opinions, whatever am used to it, it happens when you are socially liberal but fiscally conservative and tend to be one of the libertarian dems Kos has been talking about.

                            Anyway, there's still a few weeks left and I am unconvinced guess phil has some time. Maybe I will reconsider. But at least you can rest assured that Ahnuld lost my vote.

                          •  OK well, fiscal matters, that narrows my search (2+ / 0-)

                            I wasn't so sure what you were looking for.

                            Clean Up the State’s Budget Mess – Fiscal Reform

                               * Phil Angelides will cut wasteful spending and make government run more efficiently by, among other things, increasing the productivity of state operations at the same rate as the private sector, eliminating low-priority programs, cracking down on tax cheats, and managing the state’s real estate like a business.
                               * Restore Tax Fairness. To avoid cuts to education and health care, Phil Angelides will temporarily restore, for three years, the Reagan-Wilson 11% tax rates on the wealthiest Californians, those couples making more than $500,000 a year.  

                               * All New Priorities Within a Balanced Budget. Phil Angelides will pay for new investments in California’s future––including tax-cuts for the middle class, small businesses, and seniors––line by line, dime by dime, within a balanced budget by closing wasteful loopholes for big corporations, which help a favored few at the expense of the overall economy. He will a create a commission, like the federal base closing commission, to review California’s tax code and recommend a package of corporate loopholes for elimination in a single up or down vote.

                          •  Hmmm.... (4+ / 0-)

                            Trying to formulate a coherent response here.

                            I will be honest, Angelides has not done a good job of selling himself. He does come off as effete and as a snob who looks at everyone else as if they were "little people".

                            That being said, and while I realize that those points you posted were from pro Angelides web sites, I'll tell ya what. I will vote for Angelides (thankfully prop 86 is on the ballot and not something he can ram through the legislature).

                            BUT

                            If he fails to deliver then I will hold him to account just as much as I held Davis to account. I'm hoping you are right and that he won't be Gray Davis junior. I will say tho that it is a sad reflection on his campaign and him in general that it takes someone on kos to change my opinion, then again there was a reason I came back here other than being a devil's advocate on some things.

                            Just hope like hell I don't come to regret it and don't come to loathe him like I did Davis.

                            I never said I couldn't be convinced to change my mind, so yes it's been changed. Still want to see more than gov't waste cut, still would like to see what he'd do to truly benefit me in my situation but being the middle of the middle class I tend to get left behind more often.

                            So...ok will vote for Phil, hope I don't wind up disappointed.

                          •  Yea Dreggas. You are awesome! (1+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            esquimaux

                            We should ALL hold their feet to the fire!!!!

                            I hope also that we aren't disappointed!

                          •  Heh (1+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            coigue

                            Don't call me awesome yet. He slips and I will be the first one to draw and quarter him. One of the biggest issues that voters as a whole have is they relax after election day and don't hold their elected officials accountable save during the next election cycle.

                            While the recall may have set a dangerous precedent it also showed that a term is not a blank check and no one should get too comfortable.

                          •  I say this all the time. (0+ / 0-)

                            One of the biggest issues that voters as a whole have is they relax after election day and don't hold their elected officials accountable save during the next election cycle.

                            ...and am in complete agreement.

                          •  Okay, you're not a troll (3+ / 0-)

                            And don't worry, Angelides is not Gray Davis, he's got way more charisma, it's just to find him on media to see it in action.

                          •  Actually (0+ / 0-)

                            he has about a thumbnails more charisma than Davis ever had. Sorry still my opinion on him. However if and I say that in caps IF he carries out what he says he will then I will let that bit slide, after all I voted for franken-kerry (yeah right wing slam but funny when ya think about it).

                          •  Bah (1+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            CarterDulka

                            see below.

                        •  Well at the moment I am doing (1+ / 0-)
                          Recommended by:
                          Dave925

                          medical research for pharmas. I am a guinea pig and take their drugs, let them draw blood out of me to compare absorption rates. I have two master's degrees, was a psychotherapist for 20 years and a teacher, and am now living in a neon red town in MO. I make more cash doing this than teaching at a university night school or substituting during this era of No Child Left Behind which turns us all into rote feeding and vomiting robots in order to make more of them in the classroom.

                          During the Bush years I make more in two weekends doing the pharma thing than teaching an entire semester of university night school. Statistics I might add with all the headache of prepping them in elementary arithmetic so we can do the stat.

                          I don't consider this any reason to vote for the repugs.

                      •  Qualification (0+ / 0-)

                        I'm an active participant in environmental politics in California, and while there are some names on that list I respect very much, there are others I know to be blatant greenwashers and many whose jobs require them to curry favor with development interests.  This ain't all that impressive a list, frankly, and I bet Ahnold's is equally long (and thin).

                        Both candidates suck on the environment, no question about that.  I think that with Angelides in office, most of the effective environmental community will let its guard down and/or be co-opted by jobs in the administration.  At least with Arnie the governor's environmnetal record is under the microscope constantly.  That is the cold, pragmatic political reality.

                        I'm voting 3rd party, and I'm happy to throw my vote away rather than give it to either of these turds.

                        Maybe the CA Dem party will get the fucking message and get serious about the environment.

                        •  absolutely wrong about Schwarzenegger's "list" (2+ / 0-)
                          Recommended by:
                          Dave925, keikekaze

                          of environmental endorsers -- there are ZERO California environmental groups that have endorsed Schawrzenegger, and as far as individual endorsements by "environmentalists" go, here's the governor's official list:

                          http://www.joinarnold.com/...

                          Read this list, please, and realize how off-base your comment was that "Ahnold's is equally long," and how out of touch your comment makes you look about issues you claim to know about.

                          Now, if you're going to say that REAL grassroots environmental organizations would of course endorse the Green Party candidate, fine. Camejo doesn't seem to have any such list of endorsers on his site however, so it's hard to say.

                          you also might want to read the SF Bay Guardian's endorsement of Angelides for governor -- as I expect you know, the Bay Guardian has been fighting big development for 40 years, and they don't hesitate to endorse Greens, including Peter Camejo the last time around.

                          http://www.sfbg.com/...

                          •  Still Misleading (0+ / 0-)

                            Most 501©3 environmental groups cannot endorse a political candidate, so the absence of them means little.  No doubt the Sierra Club, which lost its tax-exempt status long ago, is going with Angelides as the least bad of two alternatives.

                            But is he?  Angelides's career-long benefactor Angelo Tsakapoulos is a nominal Democrat whose political affiliations cover for his financial interests.  He and his family gave some of the biggest contributions to Richard Pombo and John Doolittle last quarter. Link.  Why? Because he uses political contributions to fatten his coffers.  His aid to Angelides is no different.

                            As for the Bay Guardian, how about this profile from SF Weekly of Tskaolpoulos, Willie Brown, and Angelides.

                            The California Democratic Party has been led around by development interests for way too long.  No More!

                          •  That's just stupid. (0+ / 0-)

                            So Angelo gave money to both of them.

                            That proves nothing.

                        •  More about Angelides (0+ / 0-)

                          http://www.angelides.com/...

                          Phil Angelides - endorsed by the Sierra Club and referred to as one of the "greenest" candidates for Governor this state has ever seen - has put environmental protection at the center of his work both as Treasurer and a private citizen.  Phil Angelides will be a Governor you can count on to work tirelessly to protect the environment and combat global warming.  Phil’s action on the environment stands in stark contrast to Governor Schwarzenegger, whose actual record on the environment is as weak as his hollow rhetoric is high-handed.
                          Combating Global Warming – The Angelides Clean California Plan

                          As Governor, Phil Angelides will address global warming by capping greenhouse gas emissions and reducing California's gasoline and diesel use by 25 percent in ten years. »Click here to learn more.
                          Protecting the California Coast – The Angelides Coast Guard Plan

                          As Governor, Phil Angelides will reverse the policies of Arnold Schwarzenegger and George Bush, renewing California’s historic commitment to coastal and ocean protection. »Click here to learn more.
                          Investing in Alternative Energy

                          Phil Angelides is committed to investing California’s economy into alternative energy and clean technology, such as solar power and hybrid and “flex-fuel” vehicles. »Click here to learn more.
                          Curbing Sprawl through Smart Growth

                          Phil Angelides will put in place a comprehensive smart growth plan for California to curb sprawl, clean up the air, and allow Californians to drive less. »Click here to learn more.

          •  I smoke tobacco... (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            CarterDulka

            and I'm still voting against Schwartenneger, and:

            • Prop 85 (parental abortion notification) NO
            • Prop 86 (smoking) NO
            • Prop 87 (alternative energy) YES
            • Prop 89 (public campaign financing) YES
            • Prop 90 (wingnut funded giveway for major property owners) NO

            Looking for intelligent energy policy alternatives? Try here.

            by alizard on Tue Oct 17, 2006 at 04:09:01 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

        •  look, we've had this discussion before IIRC (12+ / 0-)

          but apparently you've forgotten which candidate the "Real estate construction interests" are REALLY behind, and it's not Phil Angelides.

          such interests are Schwarzenegger's #1 donors by industry, 18% of what he's collected this year, and what do they want?

          They want greater freedom to build in flood plains, they want gov't money to build huge new "affordable housing" developments that somehow end up not being very "affordable" and they don't want to be bothered with tenants rights anymore.

          see the LA Times story, "Checks flow in as laws flow out," http://www.latimes.com/...

          •  Ok (0+ / 0-)

            I am not going afte the real estate and development industries I am talking solely about Angelides personal record when it comes to his previous business dealings.

            I don't want to fight and argue on this, I have given more than enough reasons to not vote for him and I actually thank you for posting a diary that pushed me away from Ahnuld.

            However from those who keep saying republicans should vote their conscience more and that what the current crop has done ya'd think people would allow me, as a dem, to do the same and not vote for Angelides.

            For the record in the primary I voted for Westly. I can say that if Westly had won then I would be voting for him in the general. Unlike '04 when I reluctantly embraced Kerry after voting for Clark I cannot embrace Angelides simply because of the D next to his name. Perhaps my reasons don't hold weight in a big picture view of the world, that's yours and others opinions.

            I just cannot based on my own conscience and what I view as important to me, as a citizen of California, and as someone who has to pay taxes vote for Angelides or the party line.

            So I'll just wander off now. Sorry for being a "troll" since I often get classified as such when it comes to having a difference of opinion around here.

          •  See (2+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            jennifer poole, CarterDulka

            My response to what coigue has been saying. oh and happy birthday.

          •  Misleading (0+ / 0-)

            Angelides's biggest political benefactor by far is Angelo Tsakopoulos, who is a King Size, Grade A, Build-In-Floodplains, Slurp-Up-Subsidies Asshole Developer.  Hell, Angelides himself built subdivisions in a floodplain in Laguna, CA, and profited from govermental subsidies in the form of flood-control projects.  You can count on more of the same if he is elected.

            There are plenty of pricks to go around for both parties, unfortunately.

    •  if you're making claims (0+ / 0-)

      then trot out your talking points.

      without actually complaining about davis, state why this guy is davis-lite.

      enlighten me, because i'm tired of hearing that charge and never hearing it backed up.

      •  ok this got posted in the wrong spot (0+ / 0-)

        ive read the arguments and...

        yeah, i cant vote for ahhnold. no matter how many houses angelides built. its bigger than one or two things, politics is a dirty game. i dont want ahhnuld playin it, but he appears to be ahead in a landslide.

  •  It is not too late (6+ / 0-)
    to get behind Angelides.

    I don't understand what the hell happened in this race.  CA is a solid blue state and should be electing a Democratic governor.  

    Here's what I know:  

    1)Angelides is a lackluster candidate who spent millions on the primary
    2)I have not seen more than one Angelides TV ad (why?), and it wasn't that good.
    3) High profile Dems have endorsed Schwarzenegger
    4) Dems seem to have been wooed by Arnold's environmental policies because Phil has not gotten his message out.
    5) Angelides has had almost no support from the blogosphere

    I plan to vote for Angelides, but he is going to need serious media time to turn this race around.  

  •  I can never consider voting for him (4+ / 0-)

    Thanks for pushing this forward. I hope it makes the Recommended list.

    "No, I don't want to respond to him. He's at 20 percent in the polls. No one listens to him. He has no credibility. It's ridiculous." - Joe Biden on the VP

    by The Lighthouse Keeper on Tue Oct 17, 2006 at 12:36:53 PM PDT

  •  You can't (20+ / 0-)

    trust Arnold Schwarzenegger.  This is just another in a long line of broken promises.  He is tying to get by executive order what he didnt get in negotiations with the legislature.  He made a deal and now he is trying to get around it.  

    There is a reason why all of the major environmental groups are backing Phil Angelides.

    •  Arnold has bought off (6+ / 0-)

      a lot of people in the CA dem party.  Let's just be honest about this.

      •  Um....says you (0+ / 0-)

        so it must be....um...true?

        Is that your logic?

        •  Arnold met Antonio's price (9+ / 0-)

          Schwarzenegger made the first solid overture in this dance. In April, he named Villaraigosa's sister, Mary Lou Villar, a $149,000-per-year judge on the Los Angeles Superior Court. Not to say she wasn't qualified: The mayor's sister spent many years as both a legal aid attorney and an administrative law judge on the state Unemployment Insurance Appeals Board.
          But how many similarly qualified poverty lawyers and administrative law judges has Schwarzenegger elevated to full judgeships? Not many.
          Next, Villaraigosa delightedly supported the governor's package of construction and repair bonds, due to appear on the November ballot as a series of propositions. He appeared with the governor in several places to extol their virtues because they promise billions of dollars for his city.
          Then Schwarzenegger quietly backed Villaraigosa's scheme to take control of the huge Los Angeles Unified School District. This, the mayor insists, will be good for children. Never mind the fact that similar mayoral power grabs have proven not very successful in Chicago and New York.

          In short, the Villaraigosa/Schwarzenegger duet has essentially deprived Democrat Angelides of the support of this state's most prominent Latino politician.
          The reason plainly is power. Schwarzenegger used his to hand the mayor's sister a high-value judicial sinecure. If passed, his bond package would give Villaraigosa billions in transit funds for the mayor's pipe dream of a subway from downtown Los Angeles to the beach. Similarly, Schwarzenegger will not stand in the way of Villaraigosa's school district power grab.

          San Diego Source

    •  I won't be the least bit surprised if (3+ / 0-)

      upon winning the election, he fires all the Democrats he hired onto his staff to appear to be more bi-partisan during the campaign season.  I think I can safely say having grown up in SF that Californians can be so politically out to lunch sometimes that it astounds me at times.  If Schwarznegger somehow gets around the native born rule for presidential candidates and actually ends up in the White House, I will be very angry.  Why do people keep electing Republican actors?  It always ends in tears.

      •  The native born rule excision will have to be (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Dave925

        made retroactive. No easy task. Then we open the door to a Chinese president with deep ties to his extended family of Wong in China. A huge tribe. And do not be deluded that his loyalties will be to China.

    •  You are right (2+ / 0-)

      And there is a reason that Jack Stewart and the Manufacturers (who pushed Arnold to gut AB32 during the session) are jumping for joy today.

      Environmentalists are angry.  Speaker Nunez is angry.

      Phil Angelides just wrapped up a press conference call with Tom Adams of the CA League of Conservation Voters, Jane Williams with California Communities Against Toxics and Bill Magavern with the Sierra Club to talk about the Governor's actions.

      Essentially what this amounts to is the Governor trying to give power to his political cronies in his cabinet.  And take it away from the California Air Resources Board, which is more independent and which is lauded nation wide for being a leader on emissions caps, etc.

      Which means the Governor has even more power to move to a cap and trade system and to remove the AB32 caps as he sees fit...say when his oil industry buddies dictate.

      So the run down:

      Schwarzenegger fought AB32...then worked to gut it and the Legislature wouldn't let him...then he relented and signed (although he did succeed in gutting the bill a bit)...then he had big splashy signing ceremonies (paid for by a non-profit slush fund he maintains that is funded by special interests) and took credit for the bill he tried vociferously to gut...and then he pulls a head fake, flies to New York and with the stroke of pen succeeds in implementing the guts he the Legislature blocked him on.

      Disgusting.

  •  EXCELLENT diary. (8+ / 0-)

    This guy is NOT what he pretends to be, and he can't even pretend consistently.  If he has any principles, I have yet to figure out what they are.  As far as I can tell, he just likes power, period.

  •  Speaking of CO2 emissions (4+ / 0-)

    A big heads-up to California voters: the "no on 87" folks have paid for endorsements on slate mailers with names like "Democratic Voters Choice" and "Voter Information Guide"

    These slate mailers are basically extortion rackets, and it sounds like the "yes on 87" folks couldn't muster the cash to get a "yes" endorsement from them.

  •  Have to say, not happy with the choices (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    YoloMike, Gruvkitty, docangel

    Come Nov 7th I'll probably be voting for Angelides, but I can't say I'm really happy with that choice.  It is much the same feeling I had voting for Kerry in 2004, but worse.

    The thing that pisses me off the most is that this is California - shouldn't we be able to field some of the best Democratic candidates out there?  Instead the primary for this governor's race was one of the most negative I can remember and I just can't get excited about my decision.

    I'd like to be convinced otherwise but I just haven't seen anything to make me believe.

    Pre-order unConventional, the official photo documentary of YearlyKos 2006!

    by Raven Brooks on Tue Oct 17, 2006 at 12:48:43 PM PDT

  •  At least this news is out before the election (3+ / 0-)

    Let's see if the Angelides campaign can run with hit to help shoot holes in Schwazenegger undeserved "green" reputation.

    Support Prop 89 - Bring Clean Money to California!

    by eph89 on Tue Oct 17, 2006 at 12:52:35 PM PDT

  •  Arnold makes my skin crawl. (6+ / 0-)

    Have a beer with him.  Ewwwwww, I'd much rather not.  The thing about Arnold and George is that they prove over and over again that there is no intelligent design.

    "Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity; and I'm not sure about the universe." Albert Einstein

    by dkmich on Tue Oct 17, 2006 at 12:54:17 PM PDT

  •  Massive Giggles (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    jennifer poole, docangel, greenearth

    You know today I dropped off 23 voter registrations in my GOTV "Coffee Press."

    I made up the "Coffee Press" event to explain why I placed a lamintated registration DEADLINE calendar, and registration forms on my table at the outdoor coffee shop where I go each morning to read the paper...

    Every day I come home with zero empty registrations, and a bunch of filled out forms that I deliver to City Hall, It's fun. The best part is most peoplein my neighborhood didn't know the registration deadline was this coming monday October 23rd - and they thank me AND take forms for a pal too! Such nice folks in this Alamo Square/District 5 hood!

    It's better than sitting there anxious about the news. I take forms with me everywhere, but the "Coffee Press" has given the best results...

    My sign says:
    "No Foam - No Jitters"
    Coffee Press vote registration deadline: This Monday!

    don't block my tubes...

    by a lynn on Tue Oct 17, 2006 at 12:57:01 PM PDT

  •  How about "because I'll be voting anyway" (0+ / 0-)

    ...and might as well?

    Angelides is dead meat, and he's beginning to smell.  I don't like the Dumb Chunk anymore than anyone else, but he's got this election sewn up.

    As to the executive order, we happen to have a much more responsible California Supreme Court, and I imagine that after a bit of litigation, that will get tossed.  

    Does this move suck?  Of course.  Am I surprised?  No.  It's just the Gropinator trying to have it both ways with manufacturers and environmental voters.  Business as usual.

    But that doesn't mean that Angelides has a prayer.  I haven't seen anybody here say they're VOTING for Schwarzenegger, only that he's going to win.

    And you know who I blame?  California Democrats.  How can a party so utterly in control of a state not be able to develop ONE viable candidate against an idiot like Ahnold?  Our choices were Phil the Worm or Steve the Tax Coward.  It sucks.

    The DLC was created to prevent the takeover of the Democratic Party by Democrats.

    by Dracowyrm on Tue Oct 17, 2006 at 12:57:59 PM PDT

    •  how come? Because the Big Money and politically (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Dave925

      opportunistic and politically ambitious Democrats abandoned the field in favor of Scharzenegger who they considered "unbeatable" -- so the fight was left to Angelides (and the self-funded Steve Westley who had no grassroots or institutional support whatsoever -- just his own $43 million and his nasty campaign manager Garry South, who I blame for a lot of the "Angelides can't win" frame that the media pushed all summer long.)

      And make no mistake -- Angelides is truly a progressive Democrat -- not a Green, not a revolutionary -- but compare his record and his positions to Democratic candidates for governor in any other state? Angelides is far more progressive.

      •  Diary this down the line (0+ / 0-)

        The dynamic in CA you describe needs its own diary. Very important points you make above, how Dem primary framed up the Dem primary winner as a loser, etc, and other factors you don't mention but expect you could. The question remains for next election which will have a different dynamic:

        How can a party so utterly in control of a state not be able to develop ONE viable candidate?

  •  The Path of An Aging Egomaniac (6+ / 0-)

    I've always felt Arnie's political pursuits are more about finding a way to continue stoking his own swollen ego than anything else, a view that seems to be backed up by every move of his life, and of his every action since governor.

    After all, what's been the life path of our self-adoring governator?

    A) Bodybuilding, an occupation in which his very body gets to be the literally-spotlighted object.

    B) And then, when the old twisted treetrunk of a bod can no longer dominate the field, it's off to Hollywood, where make-up, attitude, and make believe distract from sagging musculature and, most importantly, give him the only thing he actually cares about-- returning himself to the spotlight.

    C) And now, even further aged and egomaniacal, he chooses the last career available to those desperate to self-aggrandize-- politics, Republican style politics, where being flabby and downright ugly are not career enders and egomania and unscrupulousness are distinct advantages.

    So, what's next Arnie? Gonna be taxidermied when you croak and put on display in an Evita-like glass coffin? Seems the obvious choice on the life path of such an obvious egomaniac.

    "A popular government, without popular information, or the means of acquiring it, is but a prologue to a farce or tragedy"-- James Madison

    by Bad Cog on Tue Oct 17, 2006 at 01:04:38 PM PDT

  •  You forgot one. (10+ / 0-)

    I'm voting against Arnold because he's the Republican.

    If the past six years (hell, the past 38) have taught me anything, it's never, never, never trust a Republican politician.

    Sure, thirty to sixty percent of the Democratic pols you can't trust, but it's easy to pick them out - just listen, and if they sound like a Republican, don't trust them.

    {Insert hacking cough with "Lieberman" artfully concealed within.}

    Nunez forgot that Arnold was a Republican. Nunez got schooled. Not exactly a news flash.

    Except, of course, for the schooling that California will get should Arnold get re-elected. And we say he's against education.

  •  Why is anyone shocked? (14+ / 0-)

    If he gave one shit about global warming, he wouldn't be opposing Prop. 87, which is supported by Angelides, and Gore ran his first TV ad in SIX YEARS endorsing.

    Arnold is a right-wing hack who decided to pretend to be moderate because it's an election year. In previous years, he had draconian cuts to the UC budget, refused to sign any minimum wage law, and didn't see any problem with owning several hummers.

    If Arnold is already showing that he's a right-winger only concerned about photo ops (remember this?), how far to the right will he go on Nov. 8th?

    It's time to defeat the so called media's darling. They are who makes Angelides look like a loser. Fuck them, we're taking down Arnold anyways.

    BTW, here's the Arnold Dkosopedia entry, if anyone wants to add stuff:
    http://www.dkosopedia.com/...

    •  Exactly dead on! (5+ / 0-)

      Angelides is smart and progressive, and he is being abused by the dinosaur California Democratic Party led by Art Torres, and full of overly ambitious people who take for granted California's Democrats.

      Here's a solution for progressive action to take back the CDP, check out their plan and website and see if they appeal or if you can help out.  Frankly, I'm sick of what the mainstream CA Dems are doing, and you can bet your ass they don't much care for Prop 89 either, the Clean Money Proposition

      •  thanks for the link, Torres was telling people (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Snakes on a White House

        at the CA executive board meeting that the reason the CA Dems were officially taking a "neutral" position on Prop. 89 -- despite strong support from rank and file Democrats at the earlier party conference -- was so the Dems could be a disinterested party available to fight for 89 in the consequent court battle. seems like a pretty lame excuse to me.

      •  Angelides is a LOUSY CANDIDATE (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Rachel in Vista, noneya

        It doesn't matter how smart and progressive he is if he can't get elected.  He comes off as a geek on television.  In a state as large as California, that's death.  He can win a legislative seat, or a state seat where people pretty much vote their party (like Lieutenant Governor), but he can't carry a seat that requires communication of personality.

        Face it:  the CA-Gov seat leans Rep, anyway.  It's odd, but it's true.  For a Dem to win it, he (and I'm afraid it will have to be "he", for the moment) will have to be charismatic or be running against an anti-choice Rep.  Gray Davis would never have been elected if he hadn't run against Lungren, and he wouldn't have kept his seat (until the recall) if the Reps hadn't torpedoed their shoe-in, Richard Riordan, by backing the right-wing Bill Simon.  

        Want a viable Dem for CA-Gov?  Try Harrison Ford or Tom Hanks--high positives, high name recognition, with some experience in issues like environmental protection.  Not a goofy-looking developer-turned-career-politician who runs cookie cutter ads cranked out by campaign hacks.  Or a blow-dried corporate head who claimed business credentials but couldn't figure out that California needs to raise revenues because it's buried in debt, and that means raising taxes.

        The DLC was created to prevent the takeover of the Democratic Party by Democrats.

        by Dracowyrm on Tue Oct 17, 2006 at 01:55:47 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Right, and do you know why (3+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          rolet, trashablanca, keikekaze

          we got stuck with somebody who is such a bad campaigner?  Because the Democratic Party's criteria for who they're going to support for office is WHO HAS RAISED THEM THE MOST MONEY.

          Reason #1042 to vote for Prop 89.  Get the bigwigs out of it.  Let the people decide.

          •  That's how you got Nancy Pelosi, too. (3+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            rolet, grayscale, keikekaze

            Harry Britt was far and away the better candidate for the House when Sala Burton died and left her seat open.  But Pelosi had raised money for every major Dem under the sun from Cranston on down, and they all endorsed her.  So we end up with a Stepford Representative, from the most progressive district in the nation.

            The DLC was created to prevent the takeover of the Democratic Party by Democrats.

            by Dracowyrm on Tue Oct 17, 2006 at 02:36:52 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

        •  Yeah, but Ahnold is a shittier governor (6+ / 0-)

          And after the election, he won't be "accountable" so it's full speed ahead for the R agenda.  He's another neotarded unitary executive, for crissakes!  Do your duty for the good of California and the country and vote to unseat Ahnold.  I am.

          "Life is what happens to you while you're busy making other plans." John Lennon

          by trashablanca on Tue Oct 17, 2006 at 02:09:43 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  Missing my point (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            rolet

            As I said, I'm going to be voting on issues and races that AREN'T lost causes, and while I'm there, I'll throw a vote away on Phil.  But it's a waste of #2 pencil lead.  He's done.

            The DLC was created to prevent the takeover of the Democratic Party by Democrats.

            by Dracowyrm on Tue Oct 17, 2006 at 02:38:09 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  Don't be so sure (0+ / 0-)

              The poll margins are narrowing.  If 25 percent of the Democrats--just the Democrats--who currently say they are not supporting Angelides change their minds, Angelides wins.  And Arsehold's support among Republicans is not that strong.  It's why his poll numbers never get above 50%.  California is a Democratic state.  An Angelides victory in this race is still perfectly possible.  Don't let Big Media fool you.

        •  If we really had to run a movie star... (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          keikekaze

          ...we should have ran Bulworth himself, Warren Beatty.

          But I digress.

          Angelides is the real deal. He should be ahead. He should be making Ah-nuld cry. Shame on the starstruck electorate. Shame on the starstruck media.

          PBJ Diddy, on the Foley scandal: "This is NOT 'Goody Proctor caused my crops to wither,' this is 'GOP sicko showed me his withered ding-dong.'"

          by Snakes on a White House on Tue Oct 17, 2006 at 09:45:15 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

    •  Death to the finger fucker! (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      wardlow, Snakes on a White House
      •  I wouldn't say "Death to" (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        abbeysbooks

        and recommended your comment too fast in that regard but the sentiment is right on.

        How Squaremouth got away with his fast breast gropes and finger fucks just says everything about anything anybody wants to say about this cardboard muscle boy who is utterly media created.

        This might seem off thread but it's consistent with Squaremouth's  stealthy little executive order to change a written law on global warming as though he feels entitled, as though he owns it. It's the same pattern. He's finger- fucking the environment. The Taliban would chop it off, so he's lucky he lives in a society where he, as a media-created action hero, is forgiven of everything by GOP and his mall rat constituents.

  •  Stupid Democrats (6+ / 0-)

    Cooperation with these radical Republicans is for fools.

    LA is for Lower Alabama. Also known as the Florida Panhandle for any Yankees not in the know.

    by Thom K in LA on Tue Oct 17, 2006 at 01:25:19 PM PDT

  •  i've got a story up (4+ / 0-)

    about this at GovPhil, but I'd like to cross post it if that's OK.

    GREAT diary.

    D-Day, the newest blog on the internet (at the moment of its launch)

    by dday on Tue Oct 17, 2006 at 01:35:13 PM PDT

  •  How in the hell did this hit the reco'd list with (3+ / 0-)

    this bullshit commentary in it:

    Me, I figure most of the high-ID commenters here on dKos babbling on about how they're gonna vote for Schwarzenegger because he's "green" and because Phil Angelides is "a nobody" and "all about big development" aren't sincere. Some of them sound bitchy enough to be one of Bill Bradley's (Schwarzenegger's "favorite" Democrat, just like Lieberman) sock puppets, and some of them are probably the result of the Schwarzenegger campaign's 24/7 monitoring of the Internet.

    But I'm sure plenty of voters are sincere in their "you know, you just gotta like the guy" comments -- after all apparently plenty of Americans who now hate and despise George W. Bush were fooled into voting for him in 2004  because, "you know, you feel like you wanna sit down and have a beer with the guy."

    I'm assuming it's because the Gropenator is now using signing statements?  I doubt his "W moment" will pass muster with the CA Supremes....

    -7.88, -6.72. I AM paying attention, and I am so fucking outraged I can't see straight. The W in Fascist is silent; unfortunately, W isn't....

    by caseynm on Tue Oct 17, 2006 at 01:42:29 PM PDT

    •  why is it bullshit? honestly. I don't get it. (2+ / 0-)

      you think I'm paranoid, about the sock puppet issue?

      I said "sound like" and "probably" and that's what I believe.  If you don't think the Schwarzenegger campaign is monitoring the Internet, check this out:

      http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/...

      earlier this year there was a pro-Westley poster here who finally admitted (after being challenged a number of times) to being connected with a campaign -- "although you might be surprised about which campaign." Commenters then told him in no uncertain terms that if he was a pro working for any campaign, he should be disclosing it, and that was the end of that, at least the end of that User Name.

      if you don't believe I've been seeing comments of the sort that I describe, you haven't been hanging out in the CA guv diaries.

      •  Specifically this I think is crap: (0+ / 0-)

        "...most of the high-ID commenters here on dKos babbling on about how they're gonna vote for Schwarzenegger...."  I have seen almost NOONE "of high profile" say this about Ahnold on the site.....

        -7.88, -6.72. I AM paying attention, and I am so fucking outraged I can't see straight. The W in Fascist is silent; unfortunately, W isn't....

        by caseynm on Tue Oct 17, 2006 at 06:04:47 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

    •  Signing statements - not the first time (0+ / 0-)

      I'm assuming it's because the Gropenator is now using signing statements?  I doubt his "W moment" will pass muster with the CA Supremes....

      How soon people forget. During the energy "crisis" Gov. Gray Davis issued procolamations suspending environmental regulations of power plants, and bypassing the PUC. The courts didn't intervene then.

      •  That was during a statewide crisis and I doubt (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        jennifer poole, wardlow

        anyone challenged Davis in court b/c of that situation (I am assuming, here, so please correct me if I'm wrong.)  This is different--the CA Dems are pissed off b/c Ahnold made a deal and then pulled a W with the signing statement bullshit.

        -7.88, -6.72. I AM paying attention, and I am so fucking outraged I can't see straight. The W in Fascist is silent; unfortunately, W isn't....

        by caseynm on Tue Oct 17, 2006 at 06:02:37 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

  •  The reason I am voting AGAINST (9+ / 0-)

    Arnold is he vetoed SB 840.

    There are 8 million Austrians in Austria, all with health care. There are almost as many Californians who do not have health care -- 6.5 million. And Arnold made sure that would stay the same.

    Angelides has not said he would sign the bill. Which is why my vote is AGAINST Arnold rather than FOR Phil.

    Given a choice between a real Republican and a Democrat who acts like a Republican, Americans will choose the real Republican every time - Harry Truman

    by tiggers thotful spot on Tue Oct 17, 2006 at 01:50:53 PM PDT

  •  Blair (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    trashablanca

    Didn't Arnold sign some kind of global warming initiative with Tony Blair awhile back, and get all sorts of political points for acting independently of Bush? I guess we'll add Arnold to the long list of American politicians who've duped poor hapless Tony.

    The Bush Family: 0 for 4 in Wisconsin

    by Korkenzieher on Tue Oct 17, 2006 at 01:56:37 PM PDT

    •  Yeah (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Dave925, trashablanca

      they did but it wasnt anything binding because, well as much as Cali would love to be it's own country, it isnt and doesnt have the right to sign treaties.  It was a nice photo-op.  They brought him back via sattelite for the AB 32 (the bill in question here) signing.

  •  Angelides no better on global warming issue (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    YoloMike

    With all due respect, Angelides is no better than Arnold on the global warming issue. Angelides joined Arnold in support of the Infrastructure Bond measure, which would spend tens of billions on new highway construction.

    Indeed, his position is even more disappointing when you consider that the bond also carries with it an additional $20 billion in interest costs. This was the one issue where Angelides could have pealed off support from fiscal conservaties. As State Treasurer, he should know better.

    •  Angelides is the one and only politician in (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Dave925, keikekaze

      the race willing to "make the ask" on paying for basic infrastructure needs by taxes, paid for by those who benefit MOST from such infrastructure, instead of trying to "have our cake and eat it too" by using borrowed money via bonds.

      I agree, it would've been a man bites dog moment for Angelides to say, "fuck the bonds, if us self-serving politicians can't figure out how to pay for our state's own basic needs without borrowing money from the future, how the hell are our grandchildren going to be able to do so?"

      but, you know, I really do not think you've made your case that there's "not a dime's worth of difference" between the Big Oil candidate and the progressive Democrat in the race. What you're saying is that all the CA environmental organizations were suckers or careless in their endorsement of Angelides. and I don't think they were.

      •  Endorsements (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        YoloMike

        but, you know, I really do not think you've made your case that there's "not a dime's worth of difference" between the Big Oil candidate and the progressive Democrat in the race. What you're saying is that all the CA environmental organizations were suckers or careless in their endorsement of Angelides. and I don't think they were.

        I never made that claim. He earned their endorsement based on other environmental issues.
        Also, there is a huge difference between the "mainstream" groups like the Sierra club who did indeed endorse Angelides, and the more grassroots groups, who are a lot more wary after their bitter experience with Gray Davis.

  •  You know, it isn't too late to turn this around (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Dave925, keikekaze

    Or it wouldn't be if more Democrats showed some enthusiasm about the race.  Unfortunately, everybody assumes that Arnold will act the way he has in the past three months rather than the past 3 years.

  •  ummm..I'm not voting for Angelides (0+ / 0-)

    I'm voting for Pat Qui...err..Rod Blagovich.

    Help John Laesch beat Hastert! http://www.john06.com Donate: http://www.actblue.com/page/jerry101

    by Jerry 101 on Tue Oct 17, 2006 at 02:24:40 PM PDT

  •  Republican heads of state apparantly (0+ / 0-)

    want to be Kings....
    Govenor Pawlenty of Minnesota as king even gets to change the meanings of words.  At his command a tax is really a fee!  

  •  Happy Birthday (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    jennifer poole

    And thanks for putting this up.

  •  thanks to all. I'm about to go outside for a (3+ / 0-)

    walk in the afternoon sun, and then meet some friends in town, but I couldn't have asked for a better birthday present than all the lively discussion on this diary.

    hopefully you'll all be interested in another diary I'm working on, which will explore the issue of why the CA press has been so quiet about the crisis with "systemic contamination" (that's the EPA guy's term, the Bush EPA, mind you) of the Salinas Valley agribiz farms -- 3 people dead from tainted spinach, half-a-dozen paralyzed by toxic carrot juice from Bakersfield, Mexico has banned ALL imports of U.S. lettuce, spinach and carrot juice.

    The name on all 13 bags of tainted spinach IDd so far? "Dole Foods". And who owns Dole Foods? David Murdock, a major backer ($300,000 since 2002) and close personal friend of Schwarzenegger.

    You probably didn't know that the plant processing the spinach for Dole was a repeated and current violator of wastewater stream permits, did you? See SacBee editorial "Eyes Averted: Where were enforcers at spinach plant?"

    http://www.sacbee.com/...

    and for true aficionados, check out famed E. coli's lawyer Bill Marler's blog. Marler testified at a state Senate hearing last week about the E. coli outbreak (gotta scroll down a lot), and in general has interesting things to say.

    http://www.marlerblog.com

    •  Thank you, Jennifer (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      jennifer poole, Dave925

      This was a great diary and much needed.

      The Governor's actions demonstrate what we would have to look forward to if he is reelected.

      It is also important to note (and pardon me if this has been mentioned already) but were he a true environmentalist, he would have signed SB927 that would have asked polluters who use California's ports to pay a mere $30 per shipping container to help protect our health and security.

      And he would signed legislation to push automakers to offer more alternative fuel vehicles in California--setting a standard for the nation to follow.

      And, of course, he would support Prop 87.

  •  Recall (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    jennifer poole, makeitstop

    One year after the unpopular Grey Davis easily won the general election in 2002, Californians had a recall election that resulted in Ah-nold taking over. I don't want to pull out the white flag for Angelides at this point, but I think the same effort may be necessary to oust the Governator next year.

    Assuming Ah-nold wins, I am guessing that he will pull a GWB and start showing his true partisan colors. I think it would be smart to have something already in the works so that by the time Schwarzenegger messes up, a balot initiative will be in play almost immediately.

    The good thing about that plan would be that we would have no primaries, protecting our candidates from blowing their campaign funds before the general election.

    George Bush is the architect of his own destruction.

    by lalawguy on Tue Oct 17, 2006 at 02:51:19 PM PDT

  •  Giving California to the ReThugs--eeeeyuk (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Dave925, Snakes on a White House

    what is anybody thinking?

    so you're not fired up about the dem candidate. so what?

    does misogynistic Ahnold fire you up?

    why?

    is California the consolation prize for losing the House and maybe the Senate. Willie Brown makes me sick. I don't blame Angelides for not showing up at Slick Willie's party--- Willie had the nerve to endorse Ahnold?

    wtf???

    The human race has one really effective weapon, and that is laughter.--Mark Twain

    by skywriter on Tue Oct 17, 2006 at 03:04:51 PM PDT

  •  preaching to the choir. (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Dave925, Snakes on a White House

    Meanwhile, Angelides needs money. He has far less than Arnold. I did phone banking for Angelides campaign a coupld of days ago in district that's probably 33% repug and about 2/3 of the people I called planned to vote for Angelides. Many said "democrat all the way."

  •  So what? (0+ / 0-)

    If the legislature doesn't like it, they can censure/impeach him.

    Same with the white house.

    By not protesting the action formally, the legislature is acquiescing to it.

    If the people don't like it, they can vote the executive or legislative out of office and replace it with someone who will not commit such 'wrongs'

    NEXT

  •  Schwarzenegger's PR guy Gorton (2+ / 0-)

    was an old Nixon hand from CREEP, btw.

    "Meet the new boss, same as the old boss" - and turning movie stars with pseudo-libertarian, actually-authoritarian macho personalities into Corpo sock-puppets is something they know ALL about.

    "Don't be a janitor on the Death Star!" - Grey Lady Bast (change @ for AT to email)

    by bellatrys on Tue Oct 17, 2006 at 03:31:47 PM PDT

    •  thanks, I just found a couple interesting pieces (0+ / 0-)

      about that creep, too, and his involvement with Schwarzenegger -- who's paid him over $1 million. Looks like he might have been dumped this time around though? most of the cites come from earlier.

      apparently Gorton ran Boris Yeltsin's re-election campaign, too.

      at any rate, this just reaffirms my growing feeling that it's these assholes we need to expose for what they truly are -- and the "collateral damage" of disgust and disengagement their campaign strategies cause to democracy -- even more than the candidates they dress up to sell to us all.

  •  My comment in another diary (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    jennifer poole

    to someone who claimed Arnie was a "centrist Dem" -

    B.S. Arnold is no more a Democrat
    than I am a Republican.  That he's currently doing some things to appease some moderate Dems in order to win their vote is not indicative of what he'll do if he's elected.
    He has already vetoed some progressively supported bills (Eg. universal health care and workers comp.)  And he has made no indications that he won't continue to rape funding for schools and other programs (those things he wanted done with the special election fiasco.)

    the original thread

    My Karma just ran over your Dogma

    by FoundingFatherDAR on Tue Oct 17, 2006 at 03:33:52 PM PDT

  •  Yes--I call them concern trolls (4+ / 0-)

    Me, I figure most of the high-ID commenters here on dKos babbling on about how they're gonna vote for Schwarzenegger because he's "green" and because Phil Angelides is "a nobody" and "all about big development" aren't sincere. Some of them sound bitchy enough to be one of Bill Bradley's (Schwarzenegger's "favorite" Democrat, just like Lieberman) sock puppets, and some of them are probably the result of the Schwarzenegger campaign's 24/7 monitoring of the Internet.

    And I believe that they're present here and elsewhere in the left-wing blogosphere in larger numbers than many people realize. E.g. "I'm one of you, but here's where I think you're wrong..." or "I'm one of you, but here's why we're going to lose and have no chance in the world...". The problem is that it's hard to prove that someone's a concern troll, so one has to go with one's gut instincts (which, of course, folks like Bush have given a bad name to).

    To me, though, the difference between a weak-kneed and defeatist "real" Dem who's pretty much given up on beating the right, and an actual concern troll, are largely irrelevant, as BOTH drag down out party and movement and do us no good. I put them both in the same effective category as DINOs like Lieberman and Landrieu.

    Schwartzenegger's just a different version of Bush. I.e. a profoundly amoral and narcissistic asshole who is 100% about ego, money and power, and who will do anything to anyone at anytime to get his way, and could care less about anyone who isn't of any use to him. Anyone who doesn't get this just hasn't been paying attention. And any Dem who votes for him is no real Dem. I challenge anyone to prove me wrong on this.

    "Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed citizens can change the world. Indeed, it's the only thing that ever has." Margaret Mead

    by kovie on Tue Oct 17, 2006 at 04:13:17 PM PDT

  •  Schwarzenegger is all about machine politics (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Boppy, rolet, Snakes on a White House

    And Angelides' failure to make a campaign is about machine politics, too.

    Anglides posed as to the left in the primary; now, all I receiver from his campaign are fliers on how soft Schwarzenegger is on criminals and child molesters, i.e., a campaign from the right.

    Meanwhile, as the diarist points out, Schwarzenegger poses from the left, mollifies the unionists and environmentalists who are FLATTERED by the proximity to power.

    And further meanwhile, the money men and women put their bucks into access to and control of state power.

    Machine politics. Get used to it. Until fundamental change arrives, that's what state and federal elections are all about.

    Sorry faithful Kossites. There are some exceptions, and maybe you work for them, and more power to you. But that's the truth of some 90% of what passes as electoral politics.

    Never In Our Names

    "The past was erased, the erasure was forgotten, the lie became truth."

    by Valtin on Tue Oct 17, 2006 at 04:13:58 PM PDT

  •  Now they own the media. (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Boppy, CarterDulka

    Yes, the campaign has been, They've only got one ad I've seen ("George W Bush!"), but you can't say they're the only ones to blame for lack of coverage!

  •  continuing agenda (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    jennifer poole, Boppy, CarterDulka, Leila

    Schwarzenegger's continuing agenda, is only to still money from others as he has done.  He is nothing but liar!  Hell whats with the actors and wrestler all suddenly wanting to be in politics?  He would have never got my vote to start with!

  •  I'm not voting for Angelides (5+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    YoloMike, wardlow, CarterDulka, Leila, noneya

    Why, because I like divided government. It works better than either party running the show. As they say, absolute power corrupts, absolutely.
    CA is in the mess it is right now (structural debt) because the Dems couldn't say no to any idea that came along. Just because an idea is good doesn't mean this state can afford it.
    I want a brand new car, but I can't afford one, so I don't have one. The Dems weren't able to say no when they were in power and I don't want them back in that position again.
    And, yes, I am a left leaning independent who votes primarily Democratic.

    •  relying on Schwarzenegger to provide a curb (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      peace voter, sukeyna, keikekaze

      on CA state spending is delusional -- sorry. It's like still believing George W. Bush has been reining in spending, despite the massive rise in deficit spending under his administration.

      Our self-serving governor wants to "have his cake and eat it too" with his $40 billion bond package. ($80 billion w/interest). Instead of facing reality -- that California's infrastructure needs can apparently not be paid for with current general fund revenues, so we've got to either 1. raise taxes or 2. cut infrastructure -- he's just gonna borrow it all from your grandchildren. Me, I'm voting "no" on all the bonds.

      here's the beginning (only get the beginning if you're not a subscriber) of a WSJ article, "Schwarzenegger has given up":

      Arnold Schwarzenegger is following the wrong script. After taking over as governor in 2003, he was expected to vanquish business-as-usual politicians in Sacramento -- and pull California from the brink of fiscal ruin. Instead, he has decided to put his own political future ahead of the economic survival of his beloved Golden State. How else to interpret his recent move to join ranks with his opponents in Sacramento to put a pork-heavy $37 billion bond infrastructure proposal on the November ballot?

      Mr. Schwarzenegger's move officially marks the end of his grand plans to reform Sacramento, earning him kudos from many ...

    •  Excuse me, SF Bay, but . . . (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      sukeyna

      . . . "California is in the mess it's in right now (structural debt)" because Republicans won't raise taxes, and Democrats are afraid to.  Your pal Schwarzenegger has made the problem worse.

      California is an extremely wealthy state that can easily afford anything it wants to afford.  Our property taxes are ridiculously low; our corporate and business taxes are ridiculously low.  We simply refuse to raise money in a rational way, and that's why it seems like "we can't afford" anything.  We lack the political will to tax ourselves--especially our corporate and wealthiest selves--at anything approaching a reasonable level; we'd rather watch our state slide into ruin.  If we have to pay for something, we make sure that we stick our grandchildren with the bills.

      Feh.  As a lifelong Californian, I must say I'm ashamed of what people have done to this state.  Ashamed and angry and outraged.

      I'm voting for Angelides because he may do something to fix "the mess [California] is in right now (structural debt)", which your buddy Schwarzenegger sure as hell won't.

    •  Under your theory of divided govt, (0+ / 0-)

      SF Bay, it depends on how enlightened the divide is (rare in this day and age). Sometimes divided govt helps on economic issues but what's the advantage of a divide when good ideas come along and one man, the gov, can kill them for reasons not at all rationale but dictated by corporate lobbyists?

      Thanks to one veto pen mark by Squaremouth a few days ago, for example, CA does not have a policy bill on single payer (SB 840) that would have gone on to save the state a fortune; save employers a fortune make them more competitive; attract businesses to California; save individuals and families a fortune on premiums while covering everybody.

      Squaremouth's veto of single payer was a payback to the Big Insurance lobby he lunches with regularly, not some sort of idealistic outcome of divided govt. His veto was purely corporate-centered and just dumb. But single payer will be back next year and the year after and the year after that until there is a Dem gov or an enlightened Republican gov who will sign it into law.

      On a national level, right now the GOP unitary govt has swung the balance so far out of whack on Constitutional issues that only a unitary Dem govt can bring the balance back. While we have the judicial route to try to regain rights lost from the Constitution under the Bush regime, it's a tough route to try to restore habeas corpus when the writ of habeas that would get a case into court system is gone. The alternative is eventually attaining undivided govt of Dem-controlled Congress and a Dem president to get back habeas corpus and probable cause 4th amendment warrants on surveillance and other rights stripped away from us by Bushites. Even then there will be a divide -- the other side of action being the fear of Dems to be called "soft on terror." There's always another side. You don't have to worry about that.

      BTW, I apologize for hitting the "recommend" button under your comment, SF Bay. Late, a bit tired. I meant to hit "reply to this."

  •  Like Hewlett-Packard playing wiretap games... (2+ / 0-)

    ...so does Schwarzenegger play signing-statement games.  The constant?  The lawless example from on high.  

    This is the trickle-down of fucking dishonor in our time, as I wrote in a diary awhile ago.  The fish doth rot from the head downward...

    Please visit Neverinournames.com

    by Nathan Hammersmith on Tue Oct 17, 2006 at 05:53:29 PM PDT

  •  Fake LTEs (2+ / 0-)

    I'm glad you mentioned the fake LTEs.

    I recently moved to CA so I've been watching the television ads to learn more about the Propositions being considered this November. (We didn't have ballot Props in my home state.)

    The ads are, of course, so misleading, but the one that really gets me fired up is the claim that leading CA newspapers are adamently against one of the Props (I think the environmental one) when what they are citing in each instance are LTEs rather than reporting, which given the deception, I'm assuming were all written mainly for the purpose of being able to be used in those commercials.

    What in the heck happened to integrity in this country?

  •  this really sucks (0+ / 0-)

    can anyone provide some specifics on the executive order and exactly how it undermines the claims of 25% reduction in greenhouse gasses? will there still be some reduction, or is the whole thing total bullshit? what about the 3 billion for solar power subsidies, is that smoke and mirrors too? man,i'm really fucking pissed.

    "It was a bright cold day in April, and the clocks were striking thirteen."

    by hoodoo meat bucket on Tue Oct 17, 2006 at 07:11:09 PM PDT

  •  Somebody please put a film together splicing Leni (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    jennifer poole, Dave925

    Riefenstal's Olympiad with cuts from the documentary on Obsessive compusive behavior which has lots of scenes showing weight lifters (can't remember the name somebody post it)and Sontag's analysis of Olympiad , bodily perfection and fascism.

    And I remember the image from Olympiad of the doctor with the infants having them do calesthenics. Developing their muscles before they were even toilet trained.

    And of course splices from Arnold's film on his weightlifting all throughout.

  •  Vote Your Disgust Against Arnold. (3+ / 0-)

    Arnold is a gas bag.  He should have stuck to acting on the big stage, because the current "scene" he is "playing" isn't cutting it.

    Arnold is "Bush in Drag." Plain and Simple.  He is a sell out.  He supports dictatorships, destroying the environment and talking out both sides of his well toned ass.

    We are at the moment when our lives must be placed on the line if our nation is to survive its own folly. -Martin Luther King.

    by Eyes Wide Open on Tue Oct 17, 2006 at 07:55:46 PM PDT

  •  Exceptional. Thank you. Happy B'day. (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    jennifer poole
  •  When did we start dissing Bill Bradley? (0+ / 0-)

    Remember when he was the liberal opposition to Bill Clinton? Schwarzenegger may like Bradley, but let's not tar him with guilt by association.

    "We support your war of terror!" -- Borat Sagdiyev (a/k/a Sacha Baron Cohen)

    by FischFry on Tue Oct 17, 2006 at 08:25:32 PM PDT

  •  Why bother with elections? (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Dave925, keikekaze
    Let's see, in CA we have a popular governor who:

    1.  Protected Enron from accountability for its highly profitable manipulation of CA's energy markets.  When voters learned of this, they blamed Davis for trying to force the energy corporations to reimburse Californians for the stolen profits, and replaced him with the man supported by Enron et. al.

    2.  In the movies, CA's governor slays drug dealers for fun.  As governor, he oversees draconian law enforcement and punishment for drug dealing.  As a private citizen, the governor owes his success as a male beauty pageant king, actor, and politician to anabolic steroids and cannabis, both of which he has explicitly stated helped him sculpt his body into a work of art.  

    3.  As an actor, the governor played characters who trusted and respected strong women.  As a citizen, the governor believes women are sexual play toys, and is known for being a serial sexual assaulter.  Californians are hip to strong women, equal rights, feminism, and so forth, so they proudly elected this serial groper to be their leader.

    4.  As a private citizen, CA's governor owns a fleet of Hummers.  As governor, he tells Californians he cares about global warming.  Of course he does.  Californians can tell when someone is just acting.

    Really, if the public is so gullible and so easily manipulated into supporting leaders who are the very antithesis to the public's ideals, then WHY THE FUCK BOTHER WITH ELECTIONS?  

    "When I was an alien, cultures weren't opinions" ~ Kurt Cobain, Territorial Pissings

    by Subterranean on Tue Oct 17, 2006 at 10:17:11 PM PDT

  •  Obama To Appear With Phil (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Dave925

    FYI (in the event this hasn't appeared in an earlier thread)

    Moving in a Democratic Direction!

    Chairman Art Torres & the California Democratic Party
    with USC Political Student Assembly
    & The Unruh Institute of Politics

    invite you to attend a

    Get Out the Vote Rally
    at
    University of Southern California

    featuring
    The Next Governor of California
    Phil Angelides
    and our entire Democratic Ticket!

    With special guests
    US Senator Barack Obama
     Mayor ANTONIO VILLARAIGOSA

    Friday, 10/27/2006, 2:45pm  
    University of Southern California
    (On the steps of Doheny Memorial Library
    at Alumni Park)

    RSVP Online | For more info: (213) 239-8730
    Forward this to a friend

  •  Executive Orders Ain't Strong (0+ / 0-)

    Whether a governor or even  a President, an "executive order" from any of these top folks do not have the force of law. They can clarify things, direct folks in certain agencies to perform their duties in such&such a  way, etc but they are phony baloney in terms of the law. Imagine if some guy on the street was the last fella in line to get on a bus, the bus fills up and drives away leaving him stranded. If that guy signed his own "Executive Order #8284-244" mandating that busses make an effort to let him get on 1st next time- that would have the same "pull" w/ a bus company as an executive order has on the law. They just don't match.

  •  From the Man Who Brought You the Hummer... (n/t) (0+ / 0-)

    "[T]hat I have no remedy for all the sorrows of the world is no reason for my accepting yours. It simply supports the strong probability that yours is a fake."

    by Heronymous Cowherd on Wed Oct 18, 2006 at 03:20:48 AM PDT

  •  This is the perfect piece of news 2 turn the tide (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    jennifer poole

    Phil Angelides needs to run a TV spot using this flip flop to connect Arnold to Bush the same way you just did. If you can do that voters will get in that booth see the R next to arnolds name and think of Bush!

    He who lives in the present, has no knowledge of the past nor vision for the future.

    by DeanDemocrat on Wed Oct 18, 2006 at 03:23:22 AM PDT

  •  Ugh. (0+ / 0-)

    Thanks -- but ugh.

    Be good to each other. It matters.

    by AllisonInSeattle on Wed Oct 18, 2006 at 11:24:22 PM PDT

  •  a late update here, with a Sacramento Bee story (0+ / 0-)

    confirming that national GOP officials and potential 2008 GOP Prez candidates are looking with approval on how the "power team" has "repositioned" Schwarzenegger: "In skilled political hands, Schwarzenegger campaign hums: Two key GOP operatives credited for reversing governor's political fortunes"

    http://www.sacbee.com/...

Meteor Blades, beedee, Malacandra, Bob Johnson, Mary, racerx, Tripleg, Roadie, Duckman GR, Alumbrados, Doug in SF, buffalo soldier, MattK D1, tmo, Mercurial, Marek, TXdem, SteveLCo, kid oakland, Cowalker, Mogolori, jfern, April Follies, eugene, murphy, debcoop, Ben P, Rayne, SarahLee, alyosha, laurak, natasha, DeanDemocrat, Todd Beeton, Hornito, Zackpunk, jdavidson2, human, mickT, theknife, espresso, tiggers thotful spot, MarkC, Pandora, artr2, Tuffy, danielj, Unstable Isotope, alkatt, juls, RunawayRose, Paul Rosenberg, Bob Love, RickWn, dday, Tom Ball, odum, KumarP, jabb, Heather in SFBay, Wintermute, SanJoseLady, genethefiend, democat, martianchronic, SF Bay, rhubarb, GayHillbilly, jeremybloom, StAdams, Raven Brooks, d3n4l1, brn2bwild, frisco, marjo, lilorphant, bumblebums, zeroooo, Eric J in MN, hubcap, Creosote, Cecrops Tangaroa, silence, pagerd, Vitarai, ralphie, mldostert, memberofthejury, ajwseven, sardonyx, DJ Adequate, bara, eyeswideopen, agoldnyc, tyler93023, Miss Devore, concernedamerican, healing one, bronte17, EricS, justme, foxfire burns, Athenian, wonkydonkey, SamSinister, Doc Allen, susakinovember, dicta, srkp23, EmilyD, peace voter, highacidity, Rupert, boadicea, Benjaminwise, sukeyna, Scoopster, vmibran, marchmoon, chimpy, roses, jbeach, bincbom, MJB, ornerydad, Spindizzy, chrisfreel, Shaniriver, diana04, splashy, Cedwyn, jted, Alna Dem, TNdem, Braindead, dangoch, AlphaGeek, Moody Loner, BurnetO, jsmagid, oldjohnbrown, fightorleave, Miss Jones, Gruvkitty, BmoreMD, Nancy in LA, brainwave, IMind, Boppy, trill, delphine, besieged by bush, Caldonia, churchylafemme, a lynn, kathika, Penny Century, ArcXIX, tombstone, RenaRF, coigue, Democratic Hawk, dcookie, cevad, LatidaSothere, Panda, zappini, plymouth, Man Eegee, sfluke, Marianne Benz, HK, BigDuck, kd texan, Schwede, YankeeTexan, Daddy Bartholomew, rolet, Graff4Dean, maggie sarah, vansterdam, Shapeshifter, environmentalist, Drummond, greeseyparrot, drewvsea, UTBriancl, nehark, jonathan94002, davidincleveland, joanneleon, la motocycliste, chumley, bloomer 101, Bluesee, Tarindel, saodl, drz, pattyp, deBOraaah, Smyslov, Tami B, feminatty, pop tart, docangel, LarisaW, baccaruda, LisaZ, Cook, PBen, Jashugan, Bad Cog, SoCalLiberal, Valtin, nytcek, Yellow Dog Dem Woman, kaye, juliesie, amRadioHed, Richard Carlucci, YucatanMan, Laurence Lewis, boofdah, Jules Beaujolais, lennysfo, curtadams, IL dac, Pam from Calif, concerned, jorndorff, John DE, jcitybone, Kayakbiker, Eric K, abbeysbooks, Yamara, jtg, aaronburr, hgunited, Shotput8, Cannabis, neroden, mbcarl, CarterDulka, sodalis, Rogneid, flyoverstatesman, Spathiphyllum, Sigh, Dania Audax, RainyDay, hatdog, Asinus Asinum Fricat, fhcec, bently, signalcamp, xaxnar, skywriter, SoulCatcher, makeitstop, martini, occams hatchet, Karyn, Coherent Viewpoint, trashablanca, BobzCat, rcbowman, midvalley, testvet6778, SciFiGuy, Russgirl, Arclite, moneysh, Magnifico, Shakludanto, Ohio 2nd, Naniboujou, lokiloki, kck, greenearth, donnas, ginja, TalkieToaster, Students for Bhopal, Lashe, ChrisB, Leila, Rachel in Vista, novapsyche, Demena, Dinclusin, mang glider, CABlueMuse, LJR, CA Nana, Clive all hat no horse Rodeo, 14justice, va dare, The Lighthouse Keeper, DKHOLLA, Alfred E Qaeda, Land of Lincoln Dem, Craig Burnham, slksfca, Callandor, chasm, practicalmatters, embra, DBunn, eastmt, McSnatherson, ignatz uk, old wobbly, J Royce, nhcollegedem, YoyogiBear, grassrootsbloggerdtcom, khereva, Cronesense, BR Janet, hormiguero, EdSF, aravir, DvCM, Mary Mike, Dave in PA, profmom, David Jarman, DWG, joyful, londubh, Ninepatch, newpioneer, Rex Manning, getlost, Heyroot, SBE, Vereker, Snakes on a White House, keikekaze, ucla grad102

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site