Democrats [CA] Scheming to Extend Budget Crisis! - Tilted Forum Project Discussion Community

seretogis · 07-22-2003, 12:56 PM

This is hilarious, yet sad that you probably won't hear anything about it on ABC/NBC/CBS.

LINK

Quote:

Open microphone catches California Democrats talking about prolonging budget crisis

Tuesday, July 22, 2003

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

(07-22) 11:47 PDT SACRAMENTO, Calif. (AP) --

Unaware that a live microphone was broadcasting their words around the Capitol, Assembly Democrats meeting behind closed doors debated prolonging California's budget crisis for political gain.

Members of the coalition of liberal Democrats talked about slowing progress on the budget as a means of increasing pressure on Republicans.

A microphone had been left on during the closed meeting Monday, and the conversation was transmitted to about 500 "squawk boxes" that enable staff members, lobbyists and reporters to listen in on legislative meetings.

Some members of the group, including Assemblywoman Jackie Goldberg, said if the budget crisis were extended, it could improve chances for a ballot initiative that would make it easier for the Democrats to raise taxes by lowering the threshold for passage from two-thirds to 55 percent.

"No one is running" for re-election, she said, according to a transcript made by Republicans. "And maybe you end up better off than you would have, and maybe you don't. But what you do is show people that you can't get to this without a 55 percent vote."

Assembly Republican Leader Dave Cox said that he was disappointed that Democrats would consider using the budget crisis to their political advantage.

Goldberg said her comments were part of a larger discussion about whether it would be better to make deeper cuts this year to give taxpayers a taste of how bad things would be without a tax increase.

"It meant whether or not we do the things this year or next year that let the public understand how serious the situation is," Goldberg said.

seretogis · 07-22-2003, 01:00 PM

Another link with a bit more of a skew, but more information: LINK

Quote:

Democrats Caught Plotting to Worsen California's Budget Crisis

You know the Democrats have done something awful when even the leftist Los Angeles Times breaks ranks and exposes them. "In a meeting they thought was private but was actually broadcast around the Capitol on Monday, 11 Assembly Democrats debated prolonging California's budget crisis to further their political goals."

Members of Democratic Study Group, which has pushed to confiscate billions more dollars from taxpayers, failed to note that a microphone in a committee room in the state Capitol was on as they schemed about using the Dems' favorite tactic, obstructionism, to pressure Republicans into accepting the Dems' favorite non-solution, tax increases, to fix Gov. Gray Davis' $38 billion budget deficit.

"The conversation was transmitted to roughly 500 'squawk boxes' around Sacramento that political staff, lobbyists and reporters use to listen in on legislative proceedings," the Times reported today.

Leftist Assemblywoman Jackie Goldberg of Los Angeles said: "Since this is going to be a crisis, the crisis could be this year. No one's running [for re-election]. And maybe you end up better off than you would have, and maybe you don't. But what you do is you show people that you can't get to this without a 55 percent vote."

The state Constitution requires a two-thirds majority of the Legislature to approve any tax increase, but the ballot initiative would let the Legislature sock taxpayers with a vote by only 55 percent of legislators.

Assemblyman Fabian Nunez, also of L.A., agreed. "If you don't have a budget, it helps Democrats," he said.

Democrats to the Poor: Drop Dead!

The Times admitted, "While a delay might serve the tactical advantage of Democrats, its consequences are already being felt by students, vendors and the poor: Since the new fiscal year began July 1 without a budget, the state has already begun to cut off money to some programs."

Assembly Budget Committee Vice Chairman John Campbell, R-Irvine, listened to about 20 minutes of the meeting on the squawk box in his office.

"It sounded like they were hoping to create a crisis at some point to further their political gains in other areas," he said. "I thought that was outrageous."

He said that the Democrats talked about exploiting the public's distaste for the (Democrat-run) Legislature.

"They were worried that if the Legislature appeared to have dealt with the budget crisis, the initiative may not play well," he said. "This is very surprising, considering they are in charge."

"Their intention is to destroy the state of California and its financial base," said Assembly Minority Leader Dave Cox of Fair Oaks. "They intend to hold up the budget."

After an hour and a half, a staff member finally told the dimwitted Democrats that their meeting was being broadcast.

"Oh [expletive], [expletive]," Goldberg said.

"The squawk box is on," the underling said. "You need to turn it off right there."

"How could that happen?" Goldberg said.

She later refused to apologize even after being caught red-handed and with foot in mouth.

"We're in a crisis. You don't have to precipitate one. The question is whether we should make that crisis happen now when it's really happening," was the best Goldberg could offer. "When you wait a year, you double the amount you have to cut. Is it better to do it now or next year?"

Lebell · 07-22-2003, 01:02 PM

The only reason they are embarassed is not that they would prolong the crisis for gain, but that they were caught.

Another reason I hate politicians.

Lebell · 07-22-2003, 01:04 PM

By the way, I would LOVE to hear from some California Dem TFP'ers on how they feel about this

seretogis · 07-22-2003, 01:23 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Lebell
By the way, I would LOVE to hear from some California Dem TFP'ers on how they feel about this

haha Lebell, you're a meanie ~

Phaenx · 07-22-2003, 01:31 PM

Arnold the Republican will crush his enemies!

Kadath · 07-22-2003, 02:17 PM

Man, it's going to be hard playing seretogis with a straight face. But it will make me stronger. What say you, nemesis? We dropping that hot potato, like Lebell and I dropped the concept of one on one debate based on research?

smooth · 07-22-2003, 05:23 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Lebell
By the way, I would LOVE to hear from some California Dem TFP'ers on how they feel about this

What do you want to hear one of us respond to?

First, I haven't seen the transcript and don't have the context or even a full quote.

Second, I find it ironic that the Republicans are denouncing the use of the budget for political gains.

The_Dude · 07-22-2003, 05:25 PM

lol, that's a funny story.

but i'm not surprised. what's the #1 goal of a politician?? to get re-elected and they'll go to lengths to get that.

---------

off the topic, but do y'all remember gwb in an incident like this??

he was in a fund raiser back in '00 and him and cheney were on the stage.

then bush covered his mouth and said to cheney, "oh there's [name of journalist that i forget] from [name of paper i forgot]. he's a major leage ass hole".

i got a good laugh from it.

Phaenx · 07-22-2003, 06:25 PM

He's kind of goofy. There's no way around sounding gay bringing this up, but I'd say it's only topped by when he had that throbbing boner at some rally.

Good thing he's been making good decisions.

Lebell · 07-22-2003, 06:40 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by smooth
What do you want to hear one of us respond to?

First, I haven't seen the transcript and don't have the context or even a full quote.

Second, I find it ironic that the Republicans are denouncing the use of the budget for political gains.

I knew I could count on you, bro

Zeld2.0 · 07-22-2003, 09:58 PM

Its not a surprise. And why is it Cal Dem's?

Most people in Cal don't give a fuckin rats ass about parties IMO anyways. Well a few do and they usually are in the GOP - the rest simply vote because hey it appeals IMO.

Our state can pretty much swing to whichever side pleases the majority here - often that being the Hispanic crowd (since i think they're like the majority now in CA) and so they're a force to be reckoned with - and honestly speaking most people here probably don't even really give a shit (though they should).

JStrider · 07-23-2003, 12:04 AM

talk about a little oopsies...
californias got enough issues as is we dont need creeps like these screwing things even worse...

but i do wonder if arnold is elected as governor if he will be able to "Terminate" many of our problems...

Quote:

(07-22) 14:55 PDT SACRAMENTO, Calif. (AP) --

Unaware that a live microphone was broadcasting their words around the Capitol, Assembly Democrats meeting behind closed doors debated prolonging California's budget crisis for political gain.

Members of the coalition of liberal Democrats talked about slowing progress on the budget as a means of increasing pressure on Republicans.

A microphone had been left on during the closed meeting Monday, and the conversation was transmitted to about 500 "squawk boxes" that enable staff members, lobbyists and reporters to listen in on legislative meetings.

Some members of the group, including Assemblywoman Jackie Goldberg, said if the budget crisis were extended, it could improve chances for a ballot initiative that would make it easier for the Democrats to raise taxes by lowering the threshold for passage from two-thirds to 55 percent.

"No one is running" for re-election, she said, according to a transcript made by Republicans. "And maybe you end up better off than you would have, and maybe you don't. But what you do is show people that you can't get to this without a 55 percent vote."

Assembly Republican Leader Dave Cox said that he was disappointed that Democrats would consider using the budget crisis to their political advantage.

Assembly Speaker Herb Wesson, a Democrat, tried to brush aside criticism of the meeting, calling it a "bull session" that didn't have much significance.

"For anyone, Democrat or Republican, to think there is some political advantage in this crisis, I think they are wrong," he said.

Goldberg said her comments were part of a larger discussion about whether it would be better to make deeper cuts this year to give taxpayers a taste of how bad things would be without a tax increase.

"It meant whether or not we do the things this year or next year that let the public understand how serious the situation is," Goldberg said.

seretogis · 07-23-2003, 12:14 AM

I posted this earlier, it's about half a page down.

bish · 07-23-2003, 12:44 PM

Does this surprise anybody?? Democrats want us all to suffer until they have the power to make "changes" for the better. And to make things "better" in this case, they'll just raise taxes to balance the budget so they won't have to cut any of their spending.

pixelbend · 07-23-2003, 01:18 PM

Remember, if you don't depend on government for your every need, Dems are out of power.

vinnyferrozzo · 07-23-2003, 02:15 PM

Those %$#$%ing democrats. The democrats have been in a steady process of ruining the best state in the U.S. with Grave Davis leading the charge.

HarmlessRabbit · 07-23-2003, 04:58 PM

Hahahahaha, this is *so* funny.

I'd like to hear some of the republicans on this board defend New Gingrich's shutdown of the government in 1995.

A few links in case you've forgotten:

http://www.sdsc.edu/SDSCwire/v1.21/5068.162.html

http://www.cnn.com/US/9511/debt_limi...1/shutdown_pm/

Those darned republicans don't care about the poor! They were willing to shut down the whole COUNTRY, to shut down VITAL PROGRAMS, just to advance their own policy!

Jesus, Karl Rove openly talks about the way he spins events and news and strategy for the president. They are politicians. Everyone does it. I can admit that, can you republicans?

This is a non-issue.

Phaenx · 07-23-2003, 05:05 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by HarmlessRabbit
Hahahahaha, this is *so* funny.

I'd like to hear some of the republicans on this board defend New Gingrich's shutdown of the government in 1995.

A few links in case you've forgotten:

http://www.sdsc.edu/SDSCwire/v1.21/5068.162.html

http://www.cnn.com/US/9511/debt_limi...1/shutdown_pm/

Those darned republicans don't care about the poor! They were willing to shut down the whole COUNTRY, to shut down VITAL PROGRAMS, just to advance their own policy!

Jesus, Karl Rove openly talks about the way he spins events and news and strategy for the president. They are politicians. Everyone does it. I can admit that, can you republicans?

This is a non-issue.

Does that mean you guys will stop screeching about the lack of intelligence on WMD's in Iraq, since Clinton bombed them under the same pretenses as Bush?

HarmlessRabbit · 07-23-2003, 05:09 PM

First things first. Are you dropping this point?

Your arguing strategy is called "redirection". It rarely works.

Phaenx · 07-23-2003, 05:14 PM

I never picked this point up, I'm curious though, if this is how things work then maybe we should laugh at you guys for demanding intelligence investigations. =D

HarmlessRabbit · 07-23-2003, 05:23 PM

Quote:

I'm curious though, if this is how things work then maybe we should laugh at you guys for demanding intelligence investigations. =D

I don't see the parallel at all. Maybe "we" should you laugh at "you guys" for investigating clinton then? I'm not sure how an investigation into potential presidential lies is the same as political spin-doctoring. Republicans accused the CA dems of manipulating the budget negotiations for their own political benefit, acting as if the republicans would NEVER do such a thing. I brought up that the repubs pulled EXACTLY the same stunt in 1995. I'm missing your point.

The republicans in this thread sound like the police chief in Casablanca. ""I'm shocked, SHOCKED to find that political spin is going on here!"

Zeld2.0 · 07-23-2003, 05:23 PM

All politics are fucking up this country anyways

Xell101 · 07-23-2003, 05:27 PM

This backward version of Liberalism is fucking up this country.

HarmlessRabbit · 07-23-2003, 05:30 PM

Quote:

This backward version of Liberalism is fucking up this country.

I know you're just off-topic trolling, but let's see:
President: Republican
House: Republican
Senate: Republican

By your theory, shouldn't things be getting better?

Xell101 · 07-23-2003, 05:37 PM

Quote:

I know you're just off-topic trolling, but let's see:
President: Republican
House: Republican
Senate: Republican

By your theory, shouldn't things be getting better?

It was more of a random comment that expresses my great distaste for the liberalistic way of thinking but that is a fairly accurate description. In theory yes, but they'd be screwed politically when time for reelection. For example I'll use one of the reasons I don't like bush. He isn't 'republican-ing' enough, he takes democrat issues and eventually goes along with about 75% of it.

sixate · 07-23-2003, 05:42 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by smooth
First, I haven't seen the transcript and don't have the context or even a full quote.

I'll help you there. Now quit trying to defend you lying dems!

Transcript

It's pdf format.

smooth · 07-23-2003, 09:36 PM

Right, read your material before you post it.

seretogis · 07-23-2003, 10:03 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by smooth
Right, read your material before you post it.

You see nothing wrong there?

Take a look at it again. I'm on page 2 of 4 and I see two instances of membrs suggesting tailoring the budget/budger-crises around the upcoming elections.

Zeld2.0 · 07-23-2003, 10:18 PM

nothing relaly surprises me now, every damn politician of every damn party does it, has been doing it, and will keep doing it

i don't see whats so damn great to bother with it now unless your in CA and if you are then just make up your mind when its time to vote

HarmlessRabbit · 07-23-2003, 10:43 PM

Quote:

Take a look at it again. I'm on page 2 of 4 and I see two instances of membrs suggesting tailoring the budget/budger-crises around the upcoming elections.

As I said, all politicians spin and try to time their policies for their own benefit. The Republicans did it in 1995 to the detriment of the entire country. Do you think that was right or wrong?

Phaenx · 07-23-2003, 11:37 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by HarmlessRabbit
I don't see the parallel at all. Maybe "we" should you laugh at "you guys" for investigating clinton then? I'm not sure how an investigation into potential presidential lies is the same as political spin-doctoring. Republicans accused the CA dems of manipulating the budget negotiations for their own political benefit, acting as if the republicans would NEVER do such a thing. I brought up that the repubs pulled EXACTLY the same stunt in 1995. I'm missing your point.

The republicans in this thread sound like the police chief in Casablanca. ""I'm shocked, SHOCKED to find that political spin is going on here!"

Well my point is that the attacks on Bush is political spin. 16 words okayed by the CIA turns into Bush misleading and lying to the nation? I already know that is laughable and a non-issue, I'm wondering if you're ready to put that to rest as well, since you admit your party is fond of political spin doctoring.

smooth · 07-23-2003, 11:51 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by seretogis
You see nothing wrong there?

Take a look at it again. I'm on page 2 of 4 and I see two instances of membrs suggesting tailoring the budget/budger-crises around the upcoming elections.

Here it is:

Page 1
EXCEPTS FROM DEMOCRATIC STUDY GROUP DISCUSSION
July 21, 2003

Unidentified Assemblymember [possibly Nunez]: Hannah-Beth, are you saying that if we
don?t take it to the point if we don?t get more revenues, we do not support a budget that has an
additional $1.5 billion worth of cuts. ? At least to start it off at the point of discussion
* * *
Assemblymember Jackson: ?the question is how are they going to formulate the budget they
are going to send over to us. Where?s the next $1.5 billion in cuts going to come from?
* * *
Unidentified Assemblymember [possibly Nunez]: I understand that, Hannah-Beth. My point
is, given that we know we are not going to get new revenues the, is what we?re saying that we
just want to have input as to where those cuts are going to be or are we saying we don?t support
cuts that deeply into this budget?.
* * *
Assemblymember Jackson: ?The question is, I think we?re looking at $1.5 billion worth of
cuts ?
* * *
Unidentified Assemblymember [possibly Dymally]: Hannah-Beth, ?what are we asking,
what are we saying to the Senate folks?
* * *
Assemblymember Jackson: ?We want to know what your plan is?what are you
proposing??the reality is that when the Senate sends it over to us, it is going ? it is going to be
a problem in 04-05. We want them to respect our input so that we can go out when we do get a
budget?.
* * *
Assemblymember Nunez: No. But, you know, there?s a very responsible perspective to that,
in that precipitating the crisis does not necessarily mean that -- if you?re thinking about this is,
the strategy for the 55 percent, all the polls, all the polls suggest that if you don?t have a budget,
that it lent itself to help support the effort for the 55 percent. That?s what the proponents say -
CTA and the others - are saying about that. In addition, in terms of the recall, the extent to
which the Governor can do a good job of making a connection between having no budget and the

Page 2
Republican [inaud] on the recall -- I don?t know if any of you have heard the Darrell Issa
commercials on the radio, but they?re all about the budget. It?s all about what?s going on right
now. That?s why he wants to be governor. And he?s saying ?we don?t have a budget because of
Gray Davis.? The folks that are heading up the anti-recall effort think if you don?t have the
budget, it helps Democrats in the recall effort. If you don?t have a budget, it helps Democrats on
the 55 percent. So if you?re looking strictly at outcomes in terms of how we?re preparing and
gearing ourselves to win the war on the 55 percent, there are, [inaud] I mean, there?s?
* * *
Assemblymember Goldberg: The question that I have, is that - and I go back to both ?92 and to
?78 - when people never saw what, they never got to see really up front and close what Prop 13
really did. Because what we did in education was is that teachers started subsidizing their
classrooms, and we cut out art and we cut out music and we cut out drama and we cut out sports
in some areas and, cut out tutoring and [inaud] teachers and we raised class size. And people
thought: look, schools are all still open, this didn?t hurt anyone. Some of us are thinking that
maybe people should see the pain up close and personal, right now.
* * *
Assemblymember Goldberg: ?they are 10, 10, and 5 over there. Ten want to hold out for
[inaud], ten want to [inaud], and five [inaud]. We?re going to try and find out tomorrow where
we are. ?
* * *
Assemblymember Goldberg: But we have to figure out what we do think. And I do think it
has to be in line with two things, and that?s one of the reasons that I asked Mr. Dymally to get us
together. One is how it impacts the 55 percent proposition. And secondly whether or not - if
there?s going to be a crisis to happen - if there?s going to be a crisis, whether it should be this
year or next year, in terms of members of our House who want to get re-elected, in terms of
members of our House who [inaud]. Personally, I think the crisis is better off this year than next
year. But that?s a discussion that I just want to make sure you have, and that?s happens, and
that?s why [inaud]?
* * *
Unidentified Assemblymember [possibly Laird]: ?to talk with her about the budget and see if
that?s the thing that we feel like those concerns have been removed and that it?s worked as a
political strategy. If we got every Dem but Marco and Richman to go up on it, and suddenly ? I
mean that?s the first line that can be crossed in public. Politically, there?s some statements.
And if the Senate is about to send something worse, they might be in a better position and it
might even force the out-year issue. I think that?s a strategy worth taking a hard look at. And
maybe an intermediate step is meeting with them to see if, strategy-wise, if that is something
worth recommending to this group. And should we toss that out?

Page 3
Assemblymember Goldberg: I will say that Canciamilla reported that Richman would not go
for that budget. I hear that if it didn?t include a commitment on workers? comp -- 17200 and
other structural needs.
Unidentified Assemblymember: So technically it?s (inaude)
Assemblymember Goldberg: So here?s the question.
Unidentified Assemblymember: You said both of those and some other structure.
Assemblymember Dymally: Alan? Alan?
Assemblymember Jackson: We need to also keep in mind there is another factor here. We?ve
got a problem. Excuse me, but don?t Mr. Brulte and Mr. Cox dislike each other? So, will Cox
automatically accept a Brulte budget, or is there something else?
Unidentified Assemblymember: That?s another story
Assemblymember Jackson: Well, yes that is another story.
Unidentified Assemblymember [possibly Levine]: It?s our story. It?s our story. If we?re
sitting there getting hit. At some point, the decision, as John said, has got to be 28 Republicans
or 26 Dems; it?s really their budget. So, that more Republicans go up and yet the Cox/Brulte
thing ? you know, they hate each other ? because? I don?t want to go up on that budget.
Assemblymember Goldberg: Yes
Assemblymember Laird: And whether it?s two of us who have less than 50 percent Dems in
our district that have high green turnouts or something like that. You know (inaudible).
Assemblymember Goldberg: It?s up to my successor?..
Unidentified Assemblymember: Yes, that?s not where we need to be put up our budget. So,
there needs to be a lot of Republicans up to give some people a pass and the Cox-Brulte thing is
very much trouble.
Assemblymember Goldberg: That won?t happen. I think it?s very unlikely that a Democrat will
get a pass on any of these budgets. I just don?t think that?s going to happen. If I might just say, I
think Allan and Patty both worked on that budget didn?t you? I think it would be wonderful if
we could find out in Canciamilla and Richman.
Unidentified Staffer: Excuse me, guys, you can be heard outside.
Assemblymember Goldberg: Oh, shit.
Unidentified Staffer: The squawk box is on ? you need to turn it off right there.

Page 4
Assemblymember Goldberg: How could that happen?
- 30 -

Now, this is an exerpt rather than a transcript. Furthermore, the sentences quoted aren't even complete. Almost everty sentence begins, ends, and/or includes an ellipses within it--so no one here has anything remotely resembling context or full sentences to judge by (which is what I requested) if they are relying on this "transcript".

Despite all that, quote the portion you claim clearly states a "plan" to hog-tie the state's budget for political gain and we'll discuss that.

smooth · 07-24-2003, 12:11 AM

A bit of background for non-cali folks:

Right now we have a majority of dems in the house. Due to our constitution budget measures have to pass by a 75% vote. Up until now the dems have been proposing raising taxes through a variety of methods (one of the recent contentious one has been the vehicle license fees that were just reinstated--they were given as refunds during our boom years, but they've always been around so this isn't quite "raising" taxes).

The minority repubs have been axing every budget proposal to come their way because they don't want to raise taxes--no surprise they want to cut services (one of which is the UC system, arguably one of the best education systems in the world, installed by Reagan, BTW.) Regardless of the view you take on taxes the group holding the budget from passing has been the republicans, not the other way around. While this is going on, recall efforts were put in action and built momentum on the basis of a lack of a budget and clear plan from the dems during our crisis.

From these scant exerpts it is apparent to those living here that these members are discussing the feasability of leaving the budget in the lurch and letting the people feel the crunch so they'll approve a change of the budget passing rules to a 55% margin rather than a 75% one--odd that you would label that a political "gain" for the dems. A few months ago many of you same posters were decrying the "super-majority" it was taking to nomiate judges and calling for the Congress majority to change the fillibuster rules so that the votes wouldn't need a 66% margin--hmm.

The dems aren't "stalling" the budget. The minority has consistently refused to ratify the proposed budgets for the past month. The dems have to decide if they want to play hardball and let their majority proposal sit on the table (thereby opening themselves to the public disapproval of no budget being passed because the majority--despite the minority vetoe power--is viewed as the responsible party) and face a certain defeat of Davis

or

revamp the proposal to reflect the wishes of the minority in the house and patch up the problems for another year and have it all come crashing down next fiscal year anyway (but reducing public ire by actually having a plan--even if it will ultimately fail). Since they are already facing the recall this convo seems to be weighing the feasability of cutting one's losses (that being the fact that they already have to face a recall vote) and playing hardball to at least be able to push the 55% measure on the ballot.

Of course, you don't want the reduction of ballot measure margins to a more balanced level because, if you really do know cali politics, you would know that dems are dominating the state-wide elections. Now this doesn't square with what most of you post elsewhere but since that hasn't stopped you from being inconsisten before, I don't see why this would be any different.

Lebell · 07-24-2003, 12:11 AM

I was going to quote someone from another thread, something about conservative tfp members being at odds with the principles they espouse, but I see that someone went back and edited that bit out...

HarmlessRabbit · 07-24-2003, 12:23 AM

Phaenx said:

Quote:

Well my point is that the attacks on Bush is political spin. 16 words okayed by the CIA turns into Bush misleading and lying to the nation? I already know that is laughable and a non-issue, I'm wondering if you're ready to put that to rest as well, since you admit your party is fond of political spin doctoring.

That may be a good subject for a separate thread, why don't you start one? Three times now you have refused to address the thread topic. Are you afraid of answering the question at hand?

The topic is whether the democrats were:

1- Out of line
2- Acting any differently than republican politicians.

I think they were:
1- Not out of line.

and
2- Not acting any differently than the republicans in 1995. In fact, the republicans in 1995 disrupted social services nationwide. So, if point 1 is true, then point 2 is one hundred times more true for the republicans.

Speaking of cutting social services, didn't Bush recently cut benefits to armed services veterans? So, if cutting services to the needy temporarily because of a budget crisis is bad, is cutting services permanently to needy veterans good or bad?

HarmlessRabbit · 07-24-2003, 08:17 PM

I just wanted to hop back in and say that I believe the republicans on this thread have conceded my point by not replying.

Thanks!

urizenxvii · 07-28-2003, 12:00 PM

to borrow Michael Moore's ideas, I think that both major parties have lost the mandate of heaven, as it were. The Democrats are just Republicans that claim to care about the poor and needy. We Californians need to stand up and act. There's no reason that we should be in this situation, and it's as much Republicans' fault as it is Democrats'. California, if it was its own nation, would have somewhere around the 7th largest GDP in the world. We have high tech up the wazoo. And yet public schools took another hit. We're 48th in the nation for education. Can you believe that my former high school nearly had to declare BANKRUPTCY? This started with Prop. 13 a long time ago, and it's just continued. Last thing we need is another actor as governor, but it's fairly obvious that Gray Davis isn't exactly the best choice either. And Issa... *shudder* don't get me started. "I'm a millionaire, I should be able to balance the budget of a multiBILLION dollar economy that I know nothing about!"

Anyway, the budget has been a crisis for the last ten or fifteen years, because of all the graft and porkbarrel... and the fact that they tax the heck out of the poor and leave the rich alone... I don't personally know how to fix it all, but I'm sure that there has to be someone who does. It isn't anyone in Sacramento. Maybe we can get Nader to run...

Phaenx · 07-28-2003, 01:48 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by HarmlessRabbit
I just wanted to hop back in and say that I believe the republicans on this thread have conceded my point by not replying.

Thanks!

Nope, I haven't seen this thread for a while and haven't had a chance to respond, although I could have sworn I answered you like 3 or 4 times already. Apparently not, so now I will.

Quote:

That may be a good subject for a separate thread, why don't you start one? Three times now you have refused to address the thread topic. Are you afraid of answering the question at hand?

The topic is whether the democrats were:

1- Out of line
2- Acting any differently than republican politicians.

I think they were:
1- Not out of line.

and
2- Not acting any differently than the republicans in 1995. In fact, the republicans in 1995 disrupted social services nationwide. So, if point 1 is true, then point 2 is one hundred times more true for the republicans.

Speaking of cutting social services, didn't Bush recently cut benefits to armed services veterans? So, if cutting services to the needy temporarily because of a budget crisis is bad, is cutting services permanently to needy veterans good or bad?

1- Yes.
2- No.

The.Lunatic · 07-28-2003, 07:57 PM

Well now. The USA just got about 3 points up on the most corrupt nations politcally scale. We keep this up we can be right down there w/ niger

You know finland has the least corrupt polotics in the world?

according to some UN survey of how the people felt about their government.

Then again US > Finland so maybe government does represent the people

07-22-2003, 01:02 PM	#3 (permalink)
Lebell Cracking the Whip Location: Sexymama's arms...	The only reason they are embarassed is not that they would prolong the crisis for gain, but that they were caught. Another reason I hate politicians. __________________ "Of all tyrannies, a tyranny exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It may be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end, for they do so with the approval of their own conscience." – C. S. Lewis The ONLY sponsors we have are YOU! Please Donate!

07-22-2003, 01:04 PM	#4 (permalink)
Lebell Cracking the Whip Location: Sexymama's arms...	By the way, I would LOVE to hear from some California Dem TFP'ers on how they feel about this __________________ "Of all tyrannies, a tyranny exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It may be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end, for they do so with the approval of their own conscience." – C. S. Lewis The ONLY sponsors we have are YOU! Please Donate!

07-22-2003, 01:31 PM	#6 (permalink)
Phaenx The Northern Ward Location: Columbus, Ohio	Arnold the Republican will crush his enemies! __________________ "I went shopping last night at like 1am. The place was empty and this old woman just making polite conversation said to me, 'where is everyone??' I replied, 'In bed, same place you and I should be!' Took me ten minutes to figure out why she gave me a dirty look." --Some guy

07-22-2003, 02:17 PM	#7 (permalink)
Kadath Muffled Location: Camazotz	Man, it's going to be hard playing seretogis with a straight face. But it will make me stronger. What say you, nemesis? We dropping that hot potato, like Lebell and I dropped the concept of one on one debate based on research? __________________ it's quiet in here

07-22-2003, 05:25 PM	#9 (permalink)
The_Dude The GrandDaddy of them all! Location: Austin, TX	lol, that's a funny story. but i'm not surprised. what's the #1 goal of a politician?? to get re-elected and they'll go to lengths to get that. --------- off the topic, but do y'all remember gwb in an incident like this?? he was in a fund raiser back in '00 and him and cheney were on the stage. then bush covered his mouth and said to cheney, "oh there's [name of journalist that i forget] from [name of paper i forgot]. he's a major leage ass hole". i got a good laugh from it. __________________ "Luck is what happens when preparation meets opportunity." - Darrel K Royal

07-22-2003, 06:25 PM	#10 (permalink)
Phaenx The Northern Ward Location: Columbus, Ohio	He's kind of goofy. There's no way around sounding gay bringing this up, but I'd say it's only topped by when he had that throbbing boner at some rally. Good thing he's been making good decisions. __________________ "I went shopping last night at like 1am. The place was empty and this old woman just making polite conversation said to me, 'where is everyone??' I replied, 'In bed, same place you and I should be!' Took me ten minutes to figure out why she gave me a dirty look." --Some guy

07-22-2003, 09:58 PM	#12 (permalink)
Zeld2.0 Cherry-pickin' devil's advocate Location: Los Angeles	Its not a surprise. And why is it Cal Dem's? Most people in Cal don't give a fuckin rats ass about parties IMO anyways. Well a few do and they usually are in the GOP - the rest simply vote because hey it appeals IMO. Our state can pretty much swing to whichever side pleases the majority here - often that being the Hispanic crowd (since i think they're like the majority now in CA) and so they're a force to be reckoned with - and honestly speaking most people here probably don't even really give a shit (though they should).

07-23-2003, 12:14 AM	#14 (permalink)
seretogis Huggles, sir? Location: Seattle	I posted this earlier, it's about half a page down. __________________ seretogis - sieg heil perfect little dream the kind that hurts the most, forgot how it feels well almost no one to blame always the same, open my eyes wake up in flames

07-23-2003, 12:44 PM	#15 (permalink)
bish Crazy Location: Indy	Does this surprise anybody?? Democrats want us all to suffer until they have the power to make "changes" for the better. And to make things "better" in this case, they'll just raise taxes to balance the budget so they won't have to cut any of their spending.

07-23-2003, 01:18 PM	#16 (permalink)
pixelbend Too hot in the hot tub!	Remember, if you don't depend on government for your every need, Dems are out of power. __________________ But I don't want ANY Spam!

07-23-2003, 02:15 PM	#17 (permalink)
vinnyferrozzo Tilted	Those %$#$%ing democrats. The democrats have been in a steady process of ruining the best state in the U.S. with Grave Davis leading the charge.

07-23-2003, 04:58 PM	#18 (permalink)
HarmlessRabbit Junkie Location: San Jose, CA	Hahahahaha, this is so funny. I'd like to hear some of the republicans on this board defend New Gingrich's shutdown of the government in 1995. A few links in case you've forgotten: http://www.sdsc.edu/SDSCwire/v1.21/5068.162.html http://www.cnn.com/US/9511/debt_limi...1/shutdown_pm/ Those darned republicans don't care about the poor! They were willing to shut down the whole COUNTRY, to shut down VITAL PROGRAMS, just to advance their own policy! Jesus, Karl Rove openly talks about the way he spins events and news and strategy for the president. They are politicians. Everyone does it. I can admit that, can you republicans? This is a non-issue.

07-23-2003, 05:09 PM	#20 (permalink)
HarmlessRabbit Junkie Location: San Jose, CA	First things first. Are you dropping this point? Your arguing strategy is called "redirection". It rarely works.

07-23-2003, 05:14 PM	#21 (permalink)
Phaenx The Northern Ward Location: Columbus, Ohio	I never picked this point up, I'm curious though, if this is how things work then maybe we should laugh at you guys for demanding intelligence investigations. =D __________________ "I went shopping last night at like 1am. The place was empty and this old woman just making polite conversation said to me, 'where is everyone??' I replied, 'In bed, same place you and I should be!' Took me ten minutes to figure out why she gave me a dirty look." --Some guy

07-23-2003, 05:23 PM	#23 (permalink)
Zeld2.0 Cherry-pickin' devil's advocate Location: Los Angeles	All politics are fucking up this country anyways

07-23-2003, 05:27 PM	#24 (permalink)
Xell101 Junkie	This backward version of Liberalism is fucking up this country.

07-23-2003, 09:36 PM	#28 (permalink)
smooth Junkie Location: Right here	Right, read your material before you post it. __________________ "The theory of a free press is that truth will emerge from free discussion, not that it will be presented perfectly and instantly in any one account." -- Walter Lippmann "You measure democracy by the freedom it gives its dissidents, not the freedom it gives its assimilated conformists." -- Abbie Hoffman

07-23-2003, 10:18 PM	#30 (permalink)
Zeld2.0 Cherry-pickin' devil's advocate Location: Los Angeles	nothing relaly surprises me now, every damn politician of every damn party does it, has been doing it, and will keep doing it i don't see whats so damn great to bother with it now unless your in CA and if you are then just make up your mind when its time to vote

07-24-2003, 12:11 AM	#34 (permalink)
smooth Junkie Location: Right here	A bit of background for non-cali folks: Right now we have a majority of dems in the house. Due to our constitution budget measures have to pass by a 75% vote. Up until now the dems have been proposing raising taxes through a variety of methods (one of the recent contentious one has been the vehicle license fees that were just reinstated--they were given as refunds during our boom years, but they've always been around so this isn't quite "raising" taxes). The minority repubs have been axing every budget proposal to come their way because they don't want to raise taxes--no surprise they want to cut services (one of which is the UC system, arguably one of the best education systems in the world, installed by Reagan, BTW.) Regardless of the view you take on taxes the group holding the budget from passing has been the republicans, not the other way around. While this is going on, recall efforts were put in action and built momentum on the basis of a lack of a budget and clear plan from the dems during our crisis. From these scant exerpts it is apparent to those living here that these members are discussing the feasability of leaving the budget in the lurch and letting the people feel the crunch so they'll approve a change of the budget passing rules to a 55% margin rather than a 75% one--odd that you would label that a political "gain" for the dems. A few months ago many of you same posters were decrying the "super-majority" it was taking to nomiate judges and calling for the Congress majority to change the fillibuster rules so that the votes wouldn't need a 66% margin--hmm. The dems aren't "stalling" the budget. The minority has consistently refused to ratify the proposed budgets for the past month. The dems have to decide if they want to play hardball and let their majority proposal sit on the table (thereby opening themselves to the public disapproval of no budget being passed because the majority--despite the minority vetoe power--is viewed as the responsible party) and face a certain defeat of Davis or revamp the proposal to reflect the wishes of the minority in the house and patch up the problems for another year and have it all come crashing down next fiscal year anyway (but reducing public ire by actually having a plan--even if it will ultimately fail). Since they are already facing the recall this convo seems to be weighing the feasability of cutting one's losses (that being the fact that they already have to face a recall vote) and playing hardball to at least be able to push the 55% measure on the ballot. Of course, you don't want the reduction of ballot measure margins to a more balanced level because, if you really do know cali politics, you would know that dems are dominating the state-wide elections. Now this doesn't square with what most of you post elsewhere but since that hasn't stopped you from being inconsisten before, I don't see why this would be any different. __________________ "The theory of a free press is that truth will emerge from free discussion, not that it will be presented perfectly and instantly in any one account." -- Walter Lippmann "You measure democracy by the freedom it gives its dissidents, not the freedom it gives its assimilated conformists." -- Abbie Hoffman

07-24-2003, 12:11 AM	#35 (permalink)
Lebell Cracking the Whip Location: Sexymama's arms...	I was going to quote someone from another thread, something about conservative tfp members being at odds with the principles they espouse, but I see that someone went back and edited that bit out... __________________ "Of all tyrannies, a tyranny exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It may be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end, for they do so with the approval of their own conscience." – C. S. Lewis The ONLY sponsors we have are YOU! Please Donate!

07-24-2003, 08:17 PM	#37 (permalink)
HarmlessRabbit Junkie Location: San Jose, CA	I just wanted to hop back in and say that I believe the republicans on this thread have conceded my point by not replying. Thanks!

07-28-2003, 12:00 PM	#38 (permalink)
urizenxvii Tilted Location: location, location	to borrow Michael Moore's ideas, I think that both major parties have lost the mandate of heaven, as it were. The Democrats are just Republicans that claim to care about the poor and needy. We Californians need to stand up and act. There's no reason that we should be in this situation, and it's as much Republicans' fault as it is Democrats'. California, if it was its own nation, would have somewhere around the 7th largest GDP in the world. We have high tech up the wazoo. And yet public schools took another hit. We're 48th in the nation for education. Can you believe that my former high school nearly had to declare BANKRUPTCY? This started with Prop. 13 a long time ago, and it's just continued. Last thing we need is another actor as governor, but it's fairly obvious that Gray Davis isn't exactly the best choice either. And Issa... shudder don't get me started. "I'm a millionaire, I should be able to balance the budget of a multiBILLION dollar economy that I know nothing about!" Anyway, the budget has been a crisis for the last ten or fifteen years, because of all the graft and porkbarrel... and the fact that they tax the heck out of the poor and leave the rich alone... I don't personally know how to fix it all, but I'm sure that there has to be someone who does. It isn't anyone in Sacramento. Maybe we can get Nader to run... __________________ BOOYAH!

07-28-2003, 07:57 PM	#40 (permalink)
The.Lunatic Psycho Location: Somewhere just beyond the realm of sanity...	Well now. The USA just got about 3 points up on the most corrupt nations politcally scale. We keep this up we can be right down there w/ niger You know finland has the least corrupt polotics in the world? according to some UN survey of how the people felt about their government. Then again US > Finland so maybe government does represent the people