Posted on 03/06/2007 12:42:26 PM PST by NormsRevenge
I would imagine that Generals fighting wars have to occasionally 'step back' from the individual battles they are fighting, to check on the overall progress of the total campaign against the enemy. Of course, for fiscal conservatives, the 'enemy' is growth in size and scope of spending of government at every level -- or put another way, the goal of the war is to preserve, and in fact 'win back' freedom and liberty for the people.
When California voters stepped up in 2003 to ceremoniously recall now-disgraced Governor Gray Davis, that effort was led by a strong coalition of people that felt that Davis and his administration were failing the people -- the taxpayers. An important part of that effort were fiscal conservatives, such as myself, who were concerned that our State Budget had climbed to a record $78 billion. We were outraged that the annual growth of state spending was at an alarming 7%, and that Californian's were saddled with a state deficit that was $6.6 billion dollars. As Tom McClintock points out in our "Golden Pen" column today, debt-service costs when Gray Davis was Governor were a whopping $2 billion a year.
We prevailed in the recall, and replaced the principle-devoid Davis with a new Republican superstar, Arnold Schwarzenegger. I remember chatting with Dee Snyder, the lead singer of the band Twisted Sister at the last big Sacramento Rally. It was surreal watching Schwarzenegger wave a broom in the air, yelling that he was going to "sweep the special interests out of the Capitol behind me" and then Snyder started to sing his signature, "We're not going to take it anymore" song.
Fast forward a couple of years later, and now the luster seems to have come off of the shining star. The man I voted for (over Tom McClintock, I might add -- now with regret) has gone AWOL (absent-without-leave) on the battle against the special interests, and the battles that he chooses to fight as the General elected to take on the special interests are, instead, to increase regulation and to spend more, and more, and more. Fiscal conservatives and our agenda seem to have been swept under the rug. As a matter of fact, with the Governor's introduction of a massive tax increase this year as part of a health-care proposal that is geared around the concept of government responsibility for the healthcare of Californians, it seems like California is going in the wrong direction.
Let's look at the progress on the war against growth in state government: The state budget has now increased to $102 billion (up a staggering $24 billion from the Davis era), the deficit is up to $8 billion (up a very troubling $2 billion over what Schwarzenegger inherited from Davis), debt-service costs are up to $6 billion annually (they were at $2 billion at the time of the recall), and the annual growth of state spending is just over 10% (up 3% from the Davis days). Here is a poignant statistic to at an 'exclamation point' to these numbers: state government now consumes $9.54 for every $100 in personal income.
It is clear that we are losing the war. I understand that when you have a liberal Democrat majority in each house of the legislature, that we are not going to see reductions in the size and scope of spending -- or if we do, it would only come with tradeoffs that would be equally unpalatable. But I also expected that our Republican Governor would take any measure necessary to make sure that spending would shrink under his watch.
That having been said, it is my hope that the Governor will reflect on the State of California, and if he is as alarmed at these figures above as the fiscal conservatives who just played a big role in re-electing him (based in a large part on his iron-clad "I will never raise taxes" pledge) -- that he will immediately withdraw his multi-billion dollar tax increase proposal, and officially declare the State of California to be 'chronically obese' and pursue 'trimming the fact' in our California budget with the same vigor that he has pursuing in promoting physical fitness in himself and in others. If not, California is going to have a massive heart attack.
gov. arnold's done most of the same things as gov. dumby, and has gotten by with it because there were higher taxes collected in the recent years. but that could be changing.
"Show me just what Mohammed brought that was new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached." - Manuel II Palelologus
One guy I heard call him a closet liberal was Michael Savage, but I don't know how he came up with that. What tipped you (and a few others) off from the beginning that he would do this?
He fooled a lot of people, me included, and I'm under the impression people like McClintock were also fooled. At the last minute, I decided to vote for McClintock because I thought he was a truer conservative. But I never thought Arnold was a closet liberal. Few did.
One guy I heard call him a closet liberal was Michael Savage, but I don't know how he came up with that. What tipped you (and a few others) off from the beginning that he would do this?
What tipped me off to Arnold? For starters conservative vs. liberal are package deals. I have never known a Republican social liberal (abortion gays etc.) who was an at-heart conservative, fiscal included. When they claim to be a "fiscal conservative" that's the first sign for me.
Arnold was pro abortion, pro gay, and a huge backer of arch-RINO former LA Mayor Richard Riordan when Riordan ran for governor against Bill Simon.
Finally, you have to look at who a person surrounds themselves with. The whole Warren Buffet thing was a big tip-off. Finally a guy I know who writes a political column and has worked as a campaign researcher, did some research on Arnold's top- gal Bonnie Reiss. It was posted here on FR http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/979670/posts
BTW, this is a preview of coming attractions - the Bible warns of a soon-coming a world leader who will gain power by fooling just about everyone.
That was the intent of those who inserted Swartzenkennedy into the middle of the recall.
Among other reasons, one was that fiscal conservatism cannot provide money for social liberalism. I also did not like his spending priorities, such as promoting extra spending for more long-term government programs when the state was still in Gray Davis' fiscal crisis.
During the recall campaign, Schwarzenegger was pretty open with the fact that he was a social liberal, yet he claimed to be a fiscal conservative. Tom McClintock often asked a rhetorical question along the lines of,
"How do you plan to pay for your socially liberal programs with your fiscally conservative policies?"
We've got more of these type vying for 2008 Republican nomination and I believe I will only vote for a true conservative, win, lose or draw.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.