Huh? You're asking me to explain your research after I just agreed with you about Arnold being unduly influenced by "his handlers". You've lost me.
...do you really believe this was a matter of stupidity? Really? If you do, you are either deliberately callow or willfully engaged in wishful thinking to excuse your lack of research prior to the recall election.
Ok, I get it. You're perfect. You did all the research and predicted all of this, well prior to Arnold's election, right? And all of us conservatives who reluctantly voted for this man are now making excuses for our dismal lack of due diligence?
Post the URL to where you stated all these things in public, prior to Arnold's election, or you're going to out yourself as a liar and a drive-by character assassin.
This was my FR Profile page up until Arnold won the election in October 2003 (yes--I saved a copy):
THINGS THAT TURNED ME OFF TO ARNOLD (A Work in Progress)
*Refused to sign ‘no tax increase pledge’
*Is unwilling to discuss what programs he might do to cut spending until after he is elected ("I do care about details").
*Has provided more more information about his proposed Hydrogen fuel cars (and now proposes a 'Hydrogen Highway') than he has about how (and WHERE) he will reduce spending to get this state back on track.
*Instead of balancing the budget through spending cuts, Arnold has mentioned (in passing) that he will look at selling off state assets, "demand" additional money from the feds, and pursue additional revenue from Indian tribes so that they 'pay their fair share'. When the campaign began, Arnold agreed that the state did not have a revenue problem... it had a spending problem. I have yet to see him address spending.
*While Arnold says he will reduce taxes and get more money from Washington, those are the same promises made by Pete Wilson, the man he has chosen to lead his campaign. Wilson raised taxes, and I don't believe he was successful in getting the feds to pay up.
*Unwilling to consider reductions in Education spending (even though his 'experts', 'the best and the brightest', haven't been able to make 'heads or tails' of the budget.)
*Continues to make commitments to new spending initiatives, with no detail on how he will first address existing spending problems.
*Supports (and initiated) Proposition 49 ‘After School Programs’ (aka government babysitting), a program the state couldn't afford then, nor now.
*Published his environmental platform written by RFK jr that is offers a cafeteria of excessive regulation and whacked out liberal ideas like global warming.
*Opposes school vouchers. (Even Feinstein now supports vouchers!)
*Supports the family leave mandate
*Supports California's higher minimum wage
*Opposes Proposition 54
*Called those supporting Proposition 54 "Right Wing Crazies"
*Supports affirmative action and racial quotas
*Favors additional gun control measures for Californian's
*Wants to close the gun show loophole... What Loophole?
*Considers Proposition 187 a closed issue.
*Thinks illegal aliens become permanent residents and continue to receive benefits
*Opposes current Referendum effort on Drivers Licenses for Illegal Aliens
*Considers the only problem with Drivers Licenses for Illegal Aliens to be one of security. What is it about the word ILLEGAL that he doesn't understand?
*Opposes militarizing the borders
*Describes himself as "extremely liberal" on social issues (O'Reilly)
*IS extremely liberal on Fiscal Issues
*Supports abortion
*Supports same-sex domestic partnerships
*Supports gay adoption
*'Non-traditional' Education -Ref Duluth News Tribune, The Capital Times
*No prior experience, public or private, in leading a large organization.
*Says he wants to give back to California by running for office, while never having served in any other public office before. I believe one earns the opportunity to become leader of any people. Arnold has made no effort to earn my respect, my support, nor my vote.
*Failed to vote in 13 of the past 21 elections.
*Violated Federal Immigration laws when arriving in the U.S.
*Violated State Contracting Board Laws
*Violated local business code by not licensing his current businesses.
*Posed in pornographic photos published in gay magazines, some with "adolescent boys"
*Says he is environmentally conscious yet entered into business relationships with one of the worst polluters in the country (Ira Rennert/American General-Hummer).
*Recently has gone on an intellectually dishonest campaign against fellow Republican Tom McClintock regarding donations from Indian Tribes, implying that he is on the take. At the same time, he employs on his campaign an individual(s) who has financial interests in Las Vegas and California gaming. Moreover, he himself has received contributions from individuals who have significant interests in California racetracks and card clubs. Both compete with the Californian Indians. There is an appearance of conflict within his campaign.
to be continued
You can edit this page.
C.O. -- I meant to ping you to my post #100
I thought I'd let you post the link to your analysis.