Posted on 03/29/2002 7:14:00 AM PST by ElkGroveDan
Yeah, but that was back when he looked good to the average voter. This time around, the election is a referendum on his own performance, which has totally sucked.
Who would want Greyout running anything that might affect his or her wellbeing one way or another?
Simon is a successful businessman and lawyer, to the extent that one needs credentials to run state government.
California may have the fifth largest economy in the world but, like most places, that economy is actually run by the private sector and not by whatever happens to be elected governor. Simon seems unusually well qualified to run the givernment's minority sector of that economy and to reduce it appropriately in favor of balanced budgets, private sector job-creating businesses and lower taxes that will attract the necessary capital to restore California's economy. In short, Simon will know how to keep out of the way. Greyout will not.
People who have observed California politics know all about Bob Mulholland. It was he that slandered Bruce Herschensohn, the Republican that ran against Barbara Boxer in her first Senate race, and he tried to pull the same trick on Boxer's eventual challenger, Matt Fong.
Mulholland is the political equivalent of Sammy "The Bull" Gravano, except that in Mulholland's case, "The Bull" is not what they call him -- it's what he tells us.
Done. Here's the link to it.
Never underestimate the depths in which a cornered Gray Davis will go. Davis would put television ads linking Simon to Hitler if it would sway even one vote.
Still, Davis foreshadowed a rough election season. Offering a highly selective portrayal of his opponent, he criticized Simon's lack of political experience, his spotty voting record and the involvement of his family investment firm in a failed savings and loan.
Hmmm...no personal attacks, then criticizes his family's business? Davis, you're a hypocrite and I should move back to Cali just to vote against you.
Example:
Davis hailed his accomplishments on issues including education, transportation and health care, using superlatives such as "remarkable" and "groundbreaking" to tout his record.The implication here is that the accomplishments he cites are not even worth mentioning, and that he's puffing them up absurdly to make them look good.
So why does the reporter dislike Davis? This might offer a clue:
The governor, in turn, praised himself for running "a straightforward, relatively transparent, above-board administration."That makes him look a bit like a transparent, above-board hypocrite, no?But he turned aside a request that he permit access to his fund-raising events, saying he saw no reason "to change the practice I've had my entire career."
Davis, who has raised roughly $1 million a month since taking office in 1999, keeps his fund-raising schedule private and bars reporters from the events.
I think it's very intriguing that our center-left paper doesn't think much of Davis. If he keeps on getting this kind of press, the guy's in big trouble.
"I'm not asking people to marry me," Davis said. "I'm asking them to make a decision as to who they want to govern this state."Well, yes. And we will. I don't think our decision is going to make him happy, though.
D
PS Why does he want to keep his job, anyway? It's not like he's had a particularly good time at it.
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.