Posted on 08/04/2008 4:00:38 PM PDT by ElkGroveDan
Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger has proposed a temporary one-cent increase in the state sales tax for the next three years in exchange for long-term fixes he believes would solve the state's perennial budget woes, several sources familiar with the negotiations said Monday.
The governor's proposal comes as he and lawmakers are 35 days into the fiscal year with no approved spending plan.
(Excerpt) Read more at sacbee.com ...
Is this a public admission of tax evasion on your part? California has a sales tax and a "use" tax. Anything you purchase on the internet that was not subjected to California sales tax is subject to "use" tax. You get to pay that at the time you pay your income tax to California. If you're evading that tax, don't cry when the auditors show up.
When Trojan Horses Rot
Stinky Times are back again!!!
Re-Pete Wilson
I'm shocked! (NOT!)
...in exchange for long-term fixes
Given his track record, it is best to keep a magnifying glass on those things that Arnie calls "fixes."
They won't. Period.
I hope they hold firm. I expect we'll hear Arnold whining about those 'obstructionist Republicans,' painting them as the sole problem.
Never fear, if Freddie and Fannie are "too big to fail", certainly CA is too big to fail. Messiah will bail you out.
Pete Wilson and his stupid budgeting gimmicks is what started us down this road in the first place. Pete Wilson is the reason people decided there's little or no difference between Dems and Republicans so they voted to for Gray Davis who made it all worse.
Pete Wilson always reminded me of Bush 41 “Read my lips, no new taxes!” for some reason.
You got it. This recent news tells me he's getting total resistance by the dems to the "order" to cut temporary workers.
Fascinating. All the reports from right and left pundits made clear, at the time, that it was Governor Wilson’s strong stances on Prop 187 (halting benes to illegals) and 209 (which of course the left MSM painted as his being a “racist”) which brought Gray Davis into office.
Not a penny for you Schwarzenegger. Arnold, you are stuck on stupid.
B..B...B..But ifn’ we didn’t vote for Ahnold, we were told Bustamante was a shoe-in....
Where are all the Ahnold suck ups now?
*crickets*
All of the reports, eh? You have them "all" in a box somewhere? Well I was working in Sacramento at the time on campaigns with Republican consultants and reporters and pundits and no conservative ever suggested any such thing.
Davis won because there had been no strong Republican leader for voters to identify with in several election cycles and Dan Lungren was a lousy candidate.
Maybe you should look through that collection of yours again that contains "all" the pundits' opinions from that period.
This reminds me a bit of the “Arnold only turned left after his ‘conservative’ initiatives failed”
talking points that operatives continue to float on FR.
Repeat something often enough, people will eventually come to believe it.
You were in Sacramento, I was in San Francisco. You posted what you saw in Sacto which led to the election of Gray Davis; and I posted what I saw from where I was.
There is no need for you to feel so personally intimidated as to react as you have, and to ping your your pals should they feel "inclined" (as they have in past) to form a cyber posse.
In re Dan Lungren. There was far more going on behind the scenes than your assertion that Dan Lungren was a "bad" choice to run.
Yep, Dan Lungren dropped like a stone in the race when he came out fully and strongly PRO-LIFE. He talked about being anti-abortion. He did exactly what "conservatives" say they wish to see in a "conservative Candidate". And you call him a lousy candidate. lol. "What do uber conservatives really want"? Tagline for a movie?
I see you are one of those who thinks the voters want more baby killing. If you look at the exit polls the day after the election you will see that Lungren got MORE votes because of his prolife stand than Davis did. Meanwhile the GOP lost three congressional seats in California hat year, all pro-baby-killers.
Why don't you take whatever guilt it is you are wrestling with and get therapy. You can get over it. But don't try and solve your problems by trying to get the rest of us to accept the grisly solutions that the left have foisted on our culture to deal with the random sexual promiscuity lifestyle liberals have created.
I'd like to see a million Tom McClintocks running the state. Absolutely, and never has been any question about that in my household.
Why don't you take whatever guilt it is you are wrestling with and get therapy. You can get over it. But don't try and solve your problems by trying to get the rest of us to accept the grisly solutions that the left have foisted on our culture to deal with the random sexual promiscuity lifestyle liberals have created.
I never realized I had such power to "try to get the rest of "us" (who is us, pls?) to accept the grisly solutions..." imposed by liberals.
Are you trying to tell me that unless each FR sees things exactly as you do; a new purge should go forth? Or, that you are the definitive authority on all things "California politics", or is that only in threads that you post on? If so, it should be posted at the FR home page; that way, anyone anywhere having a different take on what has gone on/is going on/will go on in CA will know right up front that there is only one correct way to view CA politics from your perspective.
I am a conservative, and I believe in winning. How to go about winning especially in a state like CA is at best debatable, at times.
But I sure wish your personal attacks and maligning of my character would not be a standard form of your rebuttals.
But, if that's what you got, ya go with it.
It's the nature of politics; it's the nature of winning wars, too.
You're on drugs sweetheart. I'm not a fraid of you or anyone else. I have very strong views on public policy issues and I deplore media conventional wisdom, liberals especially liberal Republicans like Pete Wilson who have driven our once great state to ruin. I don't give a damn what you think, but if you issue a broad declaration in a public forum based on nonsense you read in San Francisco newspaper, then I will refute such statements every time. It's what FreeRepublic is all about.
uh-huh.
“Electable.”
Is this a a spelling quiz? Or do you have a comment?
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.