Originally Posted By Kar2oonMan >>it seems that EVERY time I post something in WE<< Every time you post in WE, you have the same M.O. Post a link, sans comment. Asked to comment, you decline. It's a DISCUSSION board, not a link swap meet. Asking a poster a question is not a personal attack. I think it's because you can't answer the difficult question that's been put to you. Prove me wrong.
Originally Posted By Kar2oonMan >>the Democrats are showing they are BIG Jerks<< Thank you for that in-depth political analysis. Excellent. The caps really hammered the point home and made me see everything in a totally new light.
Originally Posted By Dabob2 <This is one of SO Many threads in WE, and I don't go in and interupt the "hate" threads, such as the current GOP Idiot thread, in fact, I haven't even read one post in it, because I know all it is in just on big bash on the non-Ultra Liberals.> Actually, it's not. It's about Rush Limbaugh specifically, which you'd know if you did bother to read it. There's even some wistful pining for the days of a more moderate, broader-based GOP, of the sort that my parents were and still are. You may see that as "bashing" but it really isn't. And as a right-leaning person, you might actually find the topic interesting. DO you think Limbaugh is the face of/spokesman for/even leader of the current Republican party? Or is that overstating the case? If you think he is, is that a good thing? Problematic? It's not the sort of opinion you could copy and paste, but you might want to weigh in over there. Or not.
Originally Posted By Darkbeer Once again, there is a thread to discuss Rush Limbaugh, and THIS thread is designed to discuss the WORDING of Proposition 1A in California and how the party in power (which happens to be the Democrats, now both in California and in the Federal Government) is playing games and avoiding being open and honest... Did'nt President Obama promise us change and a more "open" government.... Heck, this action is totally against what the President and his party promised!
Originally Posted By Dabob2 <Once again, there is a thread to discuss Rush Limbaugh,> ...which you said you didn't even need to look at because you "knew" what was in there. Doesn't look like you really did. <and THIS thread is designed to discuss the WORDING of Proposition 1A in California> This thread is about what ALL the participants, not just one, want to talk about, especially if the matters are related, which they certainly are.
Originally Posted By mawnck OK, sure. Here you go: >>If voters rely solely on ballot arguments when deciding in May whether to pass a constitutional limit on state spending,<< There's the big if, right there. Every California ballot measure includes an analysis of the cost to the average taxpayer, written on a third-grade level in big bold letters. It's the first place every California voter who gives a durn looks, not the wordy, heavily capitalized partisan rants that your little article is talking about. So, um, what's your point?
Originally Posted By Darkbeer Just came across this... <a href="http://www.modbee.com/opinion/walters/story/615560.html" target="_blank">http://www.modbee.com/opinion/...560.html</a> >>A major hurdle will be a special election May 19 on six budget-related ballot measures, and the wording of the two most important ones could make passage difficult. One, Proposition 1A, would create a rolling state spending limit aimed at smoothing out future revenue and spending spikes. One catch, however, is that duration of the income, sales and other new taxes in the budget package would depend on its passage. If it wins voter approval, the taxes would remain in place for as long as four years. If it's rejected, they'd expire much earlier. Why? It's a poison pill aimed at inducing labor unions, especially the powerful California Teachers Association, not to oppose the measure, even though they despise spending limits. At the same time, however, it creates an opening for anti-tax groups to short-circuit the new taxes by defeating Proposition 1A. Proposition 1B, meanwhile, would give schools $9.3 billion in state aid, beginning in 2011-12, offsetting a reduction in current payments that would be semi-automatic under current constitutional law because state revenue has declined so sharply. Proposition 1B, in effect, is a payoff to the CTA for implicitly accepting steep school spending cuts this year and next year (even though the union continues to publicly protest the cuts). Proposition 1B has another poison pill to induce the union to lie low: The money wouldn't be appropriated if Proposition 1A fails. Based on initial reactions, it appears that the CTA will remain neutral and not spend millions to defeat Proposition 1A, as it did in 2005 to defeat another Schwarzenegger spending limit. << So Prop 1B is tied to Prop 1A, and designed to keep folks "in line" and don't complain about the measure... Very Interesting, and more proof of trying to "rig" the system...
Originally Posted By mawnck >>So Prop 1B is tied to Prop 1A, and designed to keep folks "in line" and don't complain about the measure.<< THIS thread is designed to discuss the WORDING of Proposition 1A in California and how the party in power (which happens to be the Democrats, now both in California and in the Federal Government) is playing games and avoiding being open and honest. Post 67 has nothing to do with the wording. Please stick to the topic.
Originally Posted By gottaluvdavillains <<Very Interesting, and more proof of trying to "rig" the system...>> I don't get why you consider this "rigging" the system. Isn't the goal here to save the state from anymore finacial ruin that our current REPUBLICAN Governor has created... BTW I used all caps because I thought that is what we were supposed to do based on previous posts with "DEMOCRATES". I really don't understand why with the state of our economy right now, why so many people want to draw lines in the sand in reguards to party affiliations. Shouldn't the country, state.... come first!
Originally Posted By mawnck >>I don't get why you consider this "rigging" the system. Isn't the goal here to save the state from anymore finacial ruin that our current REPUBLICAN Governor has created... << Oy. Where oh where is my third party?
Originally Posted By dshyates "Let's bring this back on topic please" OK, Oooohhhh!!! Those lieing sack of Pooh Dems.
