Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: TheAngryClam
I beg to differ. You are assuming that there is no way to extricate California without raising taxes -- which Republicans would fight. Arnie is best situated to prevent that from happening since he is the candidate most likely to be effective in bringing businesses and jobs, including movie industry jobs, back to the state. All are aware that any governor who resorts to raising taxes risks losing much of his constituency and will be subject to recall himself.

Meanwhile, I have to ask if you were one of those Republicans who sat out the 1992 election or switched his vote to Ross Perot, thereby enabling Bill Clinton to win the presidency and the Dems to take both houses of Congress and most of the state capitals -- all because you didn't like Bush 41 reneging on his "No new taxes pledge" -- which followed his deal with Democrats to cap federal expenses?

If you think the Clinton outcome was in America's best interests, we have profound differences. Don't pull another Bob Dole (the only person on the globe who could have lost to Clinton in 1996) just to prove your point.

156 posted on 08/21/2003 6:16:51 AM PDT by OESY (Winning is everything.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 132 | View Replies ]


To: OESY
No, I'm assuming that there's no way to save California that Arnold would consider that doesn't involve raising taxes.

He won't make the cuts necessary because he loves huge social spending- it's "for the children."
157 posted on 08/21/2003 6:57:21 AM PDT by TheAngryClam (TOM McCLINTOCK is my choice for governor. He should be yours too.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 156 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson