Bush, Schwarzenegger carry separate political agendas to meeting

modesto bee ^ | 10-14-03 | scott lindlaw

[wheelgunguru]

WASHINGTON (AP) - After taking a hands-off approach to Arnold Schwarzenegger's campaign, President Bush is embracing California's next governor, hoping an alliance will win him the state's pile of electoral votes next year. But the movie actor will bring his own political agenda to a meeting with Bush in Riverside on Thursday. Schwarzenegger campaigned as a Republican who could work with the White House and pledged to carry a list of demands to the federal government.

[DoctorZIn]

California In Transition- Must read Threads!

Want on our daily or major news ping lists? Freepmail DoctorZin

[Support Free Republic]

Strong Conservative Forums Help Prevent Candidates Like This From Winning Elections
	Finish Strong. Donate Here By Secure Server Or mail checks to FreeRepublic , LLC PO BOX 9771 FRESNO, CA 93794 or you can use PayPal at Jimrob@psnw.com
STOP BY AND BUMP THE FUNDRAISER THREAD- It is in the breaking news sidebar!

[prairiebreeze]

"Now the Republicans are fully responsible for the economic mess from Washington to Sacramento," Mulholland said.

Typical Dim response to hold those NOW in office for the offenses of those that have held the office previously and caused or contributed to the problems. Much like 9-11.....

Mulholland was a geyser of caustic venom the night of the elections. It was astonishing to see.

Prairie

[Amerigomag]

Probably the most revealing article on the CA forum today.

Also probably an article that will get very little attention because it focuses on the biggest problem for Bush in California and Schwarzenegger isn't going to help resolve Bush's California dilema even if Schwarzenegger has revamped the theme of his initial and acurately honest request for federal assistance.

Even if Schwarzenegger simply begs for financial assistance to help strengthen the national, economic recovery Californians are still going to grasp the essence of the request: If, for whatever reason, you won't control immigration then you can at least help pay for the consequences of your decision.

[Reagan Man]

>>>He vowed to recover "more than $50 billion" from the federal government, saying the state pays more money to Washington than it gets back.

Arnold doesn't seem to understand, states aren't reimbursed dollar for dollar for what taxpayers send to WashDC. The defense of the US costs a lot of money and the 77 cents on every dollar that is sent back to California, by the feds, sounds pretty fair to me.

[edchambers]

Ok all you tin foil hat types there's got to be a good conspiracy theory here .What's the plan?

[patriciaruth]

Did you see the toss-away news item the other day that the Border Patrol will be launching the first of its air surveilance drones in Arizona this next month for a trial?

[Amerigomag]

Yes I did. With some interest because I have some familiarity with UAVs.

This was a political stunt designed to disarm someone. Probably a growing group of folks critical of the INS effort in the immediate region

UAV are not, at this time in their development, an economically justified surveillance tool to gather the type of information desired.

Simply put, four, readily available, used, small, general aviation aircraft with sufficient support personel are far more economical to gather the same information. These light aircraft can carry more sensors and have better all weather capability than their state of the art counterpart. Their per hour operating cost including acquistion, maintenance, flight crews and consumables are a fraction of the costs of a system as crude as FPASS which is our current operational surveillance system used at our two strategic air bases in Afghanistan and Iraq.

When real time intelligence is needed to prevent an immediate threat to a known assest then the astronomical expense of UAV's are arguably justified.

When that Arab is going to kill that airman in the next 20 minutes then the real time knowledge of that Arab's wereabouts are economically justified. When intel provides reasonable certainty that a known terroist is about to attempt to cross our boarders at a know location at a know time then the cost of stealthy, real time surveillance by UAVs is justified. If we are going to campaign a group of wanabe UAVs which are in reality harmless toys in an effort to scare an unsophisticated class of intruders then their modest cost is arguably justified.

Hope this helps? :)

[undeniable logic]

It's amazing that Arnold is already responsible for the economic mess in California. He hasn't even been sworn in yet.

[prairiebreeze]

He hasn't even been sworn in yet.

Good point.

Prairie

[Sabertooth]

Bush, Schwarzenegger carry separate political agendas to meeting

Not completely.

They'll agree on some sort of "immigration reform," which is really an Amnesty for Illegals.

Right now, Arnold likes John McCain's S. 1461, and Bush likes his Texas protege John Cornyn's S. 1387.

Cornyn's Amnesty will legalize Illegals who arrive in the next two plus years. McCain's Amnesty is only good through August 1, 2003, but will legalize even paroled Illegals.

Pick your poison.

[patriciaruth]

Thanks for the info. I have no knowledge of what surveillance drones cost, capital investment plus operational expenses..

My brother flew undercover drug surveillance along San Diego-Mexican border in small planes as alternate service during the VietNam war. He had a high draft number in the lottery, and didn't have to do anything, but when approached by the G-men he volunteered.

He finally got through the psych exams and is scheduled to get his air marshall training in a couple months. "Why do you want to have a weapon in the cockpit?" "Uh, I don't want to have my throat slit???"

[Fledermaus]

California and other border states wouldn't have so many expenses if they wouldn't extend benefits to illegal aliens.

And this state/federal war on who is responsible is ridiculous. The INS says they have no authority unless the states ask. A bunch of us called the INS after the morons in the TN legislature gave drivers licenses to illegal aliens. We wanted to know why they just didn't come pick them up.

Then the state blames the INS when they and the feds have passed silly laws that won't let them do anything about it. States can arrest the illegals and have the INS pick them up for deportation but they don't.

Then, Arnold's "we want more money from the feds because we only get 77 cents back" is such liberal lunatic charge. First, he couldn't define or prove the "77 cents" and he ignores the fact the feds run a pretty high overhead and can't possibly "give" back 100% to every state. If that was the case, why would we have federal taxes at all? We could just have higher state taxes to take care of things locally. But we forget it cost money to run the branches of government and then there is this little thing called the military and defense, the #1 priority of the federal government according to the constitution.

The Feds bailing out states for their ridiculously extravagant spending levels is like giving heroin to heroin addicts.

Under Davis, California gave away the farm to all kinds of special interest groups. And since business is leaving, these groups, mostly unionized government employees, make up more of the electorate. You can't increase overall spending by 40% based on projected revenues and survive.

And then Arnold goes out saying Indian Casinos should "pay their fair share"! Big red flag there! Total left wing rhetoric that focuses totally on revenue and not spending.

If Arnold thinks the problem is not enough revenue, he's as clueless as Gray Davis. Spending is out of control. They even pay people to push buttons on elevators in the capitol building and print out tour brochures in several languages. Can't offend those Polish tourist!

The "more revenue" attitude even gets pumped up by the lying, left wing press when they gleefully report that revenues are "down" and more taxes are needed. But what they don't report (this goes on in Tenn constantly) is that tax collections themselves are HIGHER than last year but as usual it's LOWER than projections on which money thus spent.

So it comes down to this: They project revenue and then pass what they consider laws written by God in stone to spend that projected revenue. When the projected revenue fails to come in, as it always does even though it's 5-7% higher than last year, they whine about the need for more taxes to keep up the so-called set in stone spending levels.

Then they tell us they can't cut any further or the "children" will suffer. Or they'll lay off cops and firemen and nurses. This is extortion. They even called our last TN budget without a tax increase "bare bones" and "Armaggedon". And, as usual, some in the press (not many) show all kinds of waste, fraud, stealing, living high on the hog (the TN legislature has an air conditioned and heated parking garage) but it never phases the sheep voters into action that just want another tax "for the children".

Arnold is that type of person and he's going to fail miserably. Maybe he ought to quit trying to tax casinos that will tighten up their take even more and offer less services to all those old people sitting at the slot machine and put a surcharge on his rich Hollywood buddies.

Maybe it's time for the left wing jerks that never shut up put up a 10% surcharge on any job that pays over $1 million. Let Tom Hanks, Speilberg, Barbra Streisand, Rob Reiner, etc. put THEIR money where their big fat mouths are. But then again, those same hypocrites make most of their movies in Toronto to save money and avoid over regulated union rules.

I'll bet today that Arnold won't cut the budget at all except for a few things that sound good in a one-liner. And I don't mean slowing spending increases...I mean truly cut the budget. Go back to 4 years ago and use those figures. Freeze the budget for 2 years. Can't find the "cuts"? Fire government bureaucrats.

But no, all Arnold can talk about is increasing revenue so baseline budgeted pork, waste, fraud and just plain pay offs can continue.

I'm so glad my parents moved us out of California in 1970 and I love the fact my very left wing brother whines about his taxes while living 30 miles from Sacramento. I e-mail him pictures of very small violins.

[Amerigomag]

Apparently we agree on at least one inalienable truth.

Tax revenue generated from the income of government employees is neither spendable revenue nor a redisrtibution of wealth. It is simply the cost of patronage.

[patriciaruth]

Arnold is that type of person and he's going to fail miserably

Seeing as you have a crystal ball, who is the winner of the World Series? You could save us all a lot of time by letting us know in advance.

[Fledermaus]

Considering the pithcing, it looks like the Yankees yet again.

[patriciaruth]

It doesn't take a crystal ball to "predict" the Yankees take the Series.

However, the Marlins pitching seems to have been adequate in game 1. ;-)