Replies

Tooth...you are forgetting one thing. AS negotiated with Cedillo to repeal SB60 when he was elected. Gil dance then, so AS needed to offer a return conversation now. THis is called political dialogue. I'm assuming you prefer the McClintock way of negotiations.

Yes, the state supported Prop 187, but the "Beast" is NOT the state! The "Beast" is majority LIBERAL Democrat. Arnold lives in the beast, not with the vote...yet! He needs to be bi-partison as much as he can. We cannot have a stalemate during the budget or the financial discussions/decisions.

Leasership is in influence...not manipulation or 'dictatorship' (My way or the highway). Arnold is influencing hundreds of people everyday. They will vote and they may (will) help with the flood to the polls to support GOP, Jones and Bush!

On your poll...what year was Prop 187? What has happened to the GOP since the 'hishandling' of Prop 187...not the content of 187, but the mishandling of the messaging and the rhetoric - welcome to the "son of 187" with this issue. The Dems are wringing their hands tonight with this gift, as well as the media!

Thanksd for the dialogue!

I'm forgetting nothing. AS had no negotiating position save that afforded him by the Save Our License referendum petitions.
I would have vastly preferred the ballot box. We'd have destroyed the Dems in the fight over SB60, with a lot of crossover votes.

Arnold lives in the beast, not with the vote...yet! He needs to be bi-partison as much as he can. We cannot have a stalemate during the budget or the financial discussions/decisions.

Then he should have let the referendum go to the March ballot, and let the electorate sock it to the Democrats a second time.

Leasership is in influence...not manipulation or 'dictatorship' (My way or the highway). Arnold is influencing hundreds of people everyday. They will vote and they may (will) help with the flood to the polls to support GOP, Jones and Bush!

You believe Jones and Bush will get more votes in November because AS won't reject CDLs for Illegals outright?

On your poll...what year was Prop 187? What has happened to the GOP since the 'hishandling' of Prop 187...not the content of 187, but the mishandling of the messaging and the rhetoric - welcome to the "son of 187" with this issue. The Dems are wringing their hands tonight with this gift, as well as the media!

#187 was in 1994. If you'd clicked the link, you'd have seen the poll I referenced at post #2 was from March 2003. The point was to show how Illegals are no more popular now, across many demographic groups, than they were in 1994.
The Dems should be wringing their hands, and we should be rubbing ours.

Thanksd for the dialogue!

You're welcome. Thanks to you as well.

Back when you were a prime mover and leader of the recall the afternoon and evening hosts on that "other" station ridiculed the idea of a recall -- though the evening guy claimed his show started the whole thing! Go figure.

I wrote a scathing email to the evening guy while he was on the air. I pointed out that I have been a fan of radio talk since the 1950s -- 1940s if you count Baby Snooks, Fibber McGee, et al.

I told him he was insulting the hundreds of citizens out gathering signatures. That was before Issa. IMO I told him that his comments were the most disgusting things I have ever heard on radio besides the worst of leftist babble. Was it his employer's wishes that he and the other guy trash a local competitor, I asked. I swear I heard his demeanor change. I am sure he read it.

I have heard some of your show. I can darn near say the same things about you. Rail all you want but we will still oppose drivers' licenses for ILLEGALS and any Republican who disagrees. We are citizens not Party hacks. We will not vote for dem Rats but we will not kowtow to the Party.

Yes, I heard you say you oppose DLs for ILLEGALS too.

The son of Prop 187 would be a good way to stop all this crap. But, 187 is the other guy's game, huh?

Yes, I read your reasoning for opposing 187, I had the courtesy to read them. I wish someone cuold explain how 187 "unpopularity" can be anything other than leftist spin. In an earlier post I provided figures from the 1994 election and asked the same question. 187 caused Republican defeats? How? Why did mainstream Republican candidates avoid conservative talk radio prior to 2000? (At least in N. California) Avoiding conservatives hurt them, not 187. IMO.

To "Sabertooth": I'm assuming you prefer the McClintock way of negotiations

Is Eric a quick study, or what?

The other thing is that Sabertooth will always respond, and never (that I've seen) to admit his error. So, at some point, you just have to start throwing your seed onto more fertile soil.

Dan