Replies

You know I used to think that McClintock was an excellent but unkown candidate. However, after doing some research I have come to the conclusion that he is totally unsuited to be governor

In his whole legislative career, McClintock hasn't accomplished anything. Sure he's been a fiscal conservative (whatever that means) but his only concrete accomplishment according to the bio on his website was the Mello-Condit-McClintock Tax Rebate Act in 1987. That was 16 years ago. What has he done lately other than complaining and voting against state budgets?

Speaking of accomplishments, what exactly will McClintock do as governor? He seems to have four things in mind: 1. End the car tax 2. Void the energy contracts 3. Fix worker compensation 4. Cut funding to redundant agencies. Well everyone wants to end the car tax so he's welcome to join the party. 2 is totally unworkable because he can't just rip up a legally binding contract without spending years in lawsuits and risking the chance that utilities will simply cut off the power to California. 3 and 4 sound good but I can't see how he's going to it. Apparently, his plan of action is to tell the legislature "Do this or I'll complain about you to the public". Yeah, that's really going to work. More likely the state will end up totally in gridlock with everyone blaming everyone else.

Now a lot of people on this board (mostly out of state it seems) have fixated on McClintock's conservative social views regarding abortion, gun rights, gay rights etc. vs. Arnold's "liberal" views. However, what has McClintock done regarding these issues? Unlike Arnold he had 20 years in the legislature and he did absolutely nothing. How's that any better than Arnold?

Finally it seems that McClintock and his campaign are fixated upon Arnold. I have never heard, seen, or read him saying anything critical about Davis or Bustamante. It has always been "I'm gaining momentum, Arnold is an amateur, so vote for me instead of him". Why doesn't he mention Davis or Bustamante? Does he even care about them? Isn't he even going to try to get the support of moderates and independents? Is McClintock running a serious gubenatorial bid or is he just trying to spite the California GOP?

In essence, McClintock has accomplished nothing in 20 years other than talking and going on ego trips about how he knows everything and everyone else is an idiot for not listening to him. His idea of leadership is "Do this or I'll tell" and his plans to fix California are typical of a career politician - they sound good but are totally unworkable in practice. He says the "correct" things regarding certain social issues but it's clear that he hasn't and won't make a stand on them. Finally, even his motives about running for governor are questionable. Exactly why is he running this campaign?

Now contrast this with Arnold. Since his teenage years, Arnold has achieved everything he wanted to achieve. He wanted to be a world class body builder and he won the Mr. Universe a record six times. He wanted to be an actor and he's now one of the world's best known. He wanted to be a businessman and now he's raking in millions a year. When Arnold wanted to get into the politics with Prop. 49, he was successful by a wide margin. Now Arnold wants to be governor with the goal of fixing California. Given his track record as a doer and a winner vs. McClintock's track record of a talker and a loser (after all he lost every statewide election he's been in), who would you seriously vote for?

In his whole legislative career, McClintock hasn't accomplished anything. Sure he's been a fiscal conservative (whatever that means) but his only concrete accomplishment according to the bio on his website was the Mello-Condit-McClintock Tax Rebate Act in 1987. That was 16 years ago. What has he done lately other than complaining and voting against state budgets?

What a bizarre argument!? If the point is that California has gone down the tubes, why would you be looking for a candidate who had a hand in it? I would think we would be supporting the lone wolf who saw the writing on the wall for the last two decades. I lived the first 8 years of my life out here, then moved to CO kicking and screaming. 25 years later, I am back and I do not in any way recognize the state I left behind.

I, for one, like your post and agree with it. What great accomplishments does Tom have? What is his track record of success?

Cheers, CC :)

Mega BUMP!

Actually, Tom's argument for voiding the energy contracts is that they are NOT legally binding.

It's based on a conflict of interest of the negotiator for the state. California law is settled that contracts signed by such agents are legally unenforceable.

Great post, I agree.

And why should he mention Davis or Bustamante?

It's practically a given that those two suck, at least among the people willing to vote for a Republican, so he needs to make the case he's a better candidate than Arnold.

Being better than Davis and Cruz is considered a given.

McClintock has explained these items. On the chance you're interested in the answers, unlike other anti-McClintock voices on these threads...

Void the energy contracts... totally unworkable because he can't just rip up a legally binding contract without spending years in lawsuits and risking the chance that utilities will simply cut off the power to California.

The contracts will be easily voided because he will stipulate to the conflict of interest involved by the prior administration's use of a representative in the negotiations with the energy companies being simultaneously a paid lobbyist for the energy industry. That immediately nullifies the contracts. Davis won't make that stipulation because it just provides one more example of how sleazy/incompetent he is.

3. Fix worker compensation 4. Cut funding to redundant agencies... 3 and 4 sound good but I can't see how he's going to it.

His plan is to put bills on these matters before the state legislature. If they don't act on them within 30 days, he'll use the initiative process to put each of the issues on the ballot for the people to vote on.

Sounds like a pretty good plan to me.

You're wrong on a number of points. First, McClintock can easily void the energy contracts because tehy were negotiated in bad faith by someone with a conflict of interest. Davis can't do that because he would have to admit gross incompetence in appointing that individual. His plan is simple and spicific. He actually SAYS how he is going to accomplish 1,2,3,and 4.

Also, there's a lot of sick-legislation that the legislature passes, like the revised sex ed curriculum, that Arnold would sign but McClintock would not.

McClintock also favors school choice; while Arnold does not (yet he sent his kids to private school). That kind of hypocracy is too much for me.

Did he not accomplish enough in the state leg? the Rs are a tiny minority and are all but ignored. Note he also wrote the currently-in-effect death penalty law. He has been in the leadership of the state assembly.

It just sounds like you are downplaying the man and all his credentials inside and outside the state leg.

I would rather have Bustamecha win than ARnold, because then I'd be more confident of an R in the gov's seat in 2006.

His major accomplishment has been an increasingly important vote "NAY" in an increasingly socialist California.

Perhaps you'd feel better if he had "accomplished" something "big" by putting total control over the state's gasoline in government hands? Some other form of additional government power?