AMEN.
This is one of the things that bugs me most about the Romney and Meg Whitman types. They talk about making government "more efficient." That means it gets better at confiscating my money and liberty, charging me fees to exercise what little liberty I have left, and doing it more efficiently.
To hell with government that is "more efficient." America needs LESS GOVERNMENT. I want much of government SLASHED and ELIMINATED when it involves itself in going places the Constitution said government should not go.
The FIRST thing that has to be done to solve this problem is to have minimal requirements on voters. Legal photo ID would be a good start. Vote fraud and manipulation is contributing hugely to this crisis, and the crisis cannot be overcome if the vote fraud is not addressed. This would be a start.
That said, legtimate voters will give Meg Whitman the CA governership, I'm afraid, and I have pretty much determined that they'll do it without my vote. I state flatly: Jerry Brown would be preferable because he would do less damage in the long run and in the big picture. In the short run and small picture, he would do only marginally worse than Whitman, and certainly Whitman can do more damage to the Republican party image than Brown could ever aspire to do.
But here I confess that, while my decided opposition to Romney comes from reading and hearing his words, knowing a bit about his past, knowing some of the Republicans who support him, and other things of the mind and logic, my disdain for Meg Whitman is visceral. She creeps me out. In her voice and her mode of dress, she is the very model of the kind of professional woman who wastes time, plays games, pulls power trips, and likes power. Steer clear.
I wish she had registered as a Democrat.