Effective — The SCV Talk Archive

Effective

By Jeff — Jeff Wilson

Jerry Brown’s new ad attacking Meg Whitman as Schwarzenegger 2.0 is pretty good:

I was a Schwarzenegger voter in 2003, excited by our unorthodox recall process and happy to kick Gray Davis to the curb. We needed an outsider, someone fresh and untainted by the Sacramento sewer to go in and fix things up. It was an attractive proposition.

And yet, here we are, 7 years later in a much worse state than when Davis left. Not all of it is Scwharzenegger’s fault but it’s clear his take-no-prisoners approach in 2005 alienated many powerful interests and didn’t help the state much.

Meg is more of the same. Say what you will about Brown, at least he knows Sacramento and won’t need to get familiar with all the names and routines of our Capitol.

Brown leads Whitman 47-40 in the latest polling.

Comments (30)

Samuel AdamsOctober 20, 2010 at 2:25 pm

Electing Jerry Brown as governor again would be like electing Jimmy Carter president again…….oh, I guess we kind of did that didn’t we?…..ooops….

Bill ReynoldsOctober 20, 2010 at 2:49 pm

You are correct, Sam! Very funny!!

Daddy Joe GOctober 20, 2010 at 3:32 pm

I voted for Carter when he ran againt Brown, and I voted for Ragan when he ran against Brown. Don’t think I’ll make that mistake a third time.

Your Web GuruOctober 21, 2010 at 8:26 am

Someone recently remarked that Meg Whitman looks like “a thumb with a face.” Now while that has nothing to do with her politics, I now can’t help but giggle whenever I see her. Yes, there’s a five-year-old inside me just dying to get out!

cashOctober 20, 2010 at 2:28 pm

Very good, unfortunately you can apply the same spin to most every candidate across the country. They all say what they think we want/need to hear.

OlenkaOctober 20, 2010 at 2:35 pm

And then they get elected and do nothing what they said they were gonna do. Yay Politicians!

drive66October 20, 2010 at 2:39 pm

That is heeeelarious! Now can we get a third candidate cuz these two suck;-)

OlenkaOctober 20, 2010 at 3:15 pm

There are a bunch of other candidates. Maybe you’ll find someone that you actually like. You don’t have to choose “the lesser of two evils.” I can’t stand that saying; it’s such a cop-out. There are other choices: Laura Wells, Dale Ogden, Carlos Alvarez. Everyone is always complaining about how lousy the Republicans and Democrats are running the country, yet they still subscribe to one party, hoping that someday it will get better. God I’d love to see America let go of the two-party system. Eh… one can dream, right?

ReaderMamaOctober 20, 2010 at 4:24 pm

Tried that too — can you say Perot? How about Nader?

drive66October 20, 2010 at 4:27 pm

I meant another candidate that could actually win.

KevitivityOctober 20, 2010 at 2:58 pm

I think Meg probably is more or less the same, but I still find her a better choice than Brown.

Samuel AdamsOctober 21, 2010 at 8:51 am

Same here.

Whiskey Tango FoxtrotOctober 20, 2010 at 3:37 pm

Ironic Isn’t it Jeff that had the voters approved Arnold’s “take no prisoners” ballot measures in 05, we’d be a hell of a lot better off financially now? When he ran for Governor, he kept it no secret that if he was elected he would propose to the voters what eventually became prop’s 73,74,76,77. Most folks thought that was a great idea until they actually had to vote on it. I don’t blame Arnie one bit. The fault rests on the shoulders of the voters who voted the propositions down. So when you say “Meg is more of the same”, I kinda wanna go, huh?

CCOctober 20, 2010 at 3:39 pm

Yep

Coastal SageOctober 20, 2010 at 3:42 pm

I, too, was thrilled to see Gray Davis recalled, because he sold Santa Clarita’s residents and environmentalists down the river, in signing a bill (vehemently opposed by the California Sierra Club and Santa Clarita’s Democrats) which pandered to CLWA and to its puppeteer Newhall Land. When Davis left office, he went to work for big time law firm Loeb & Loeb, and thereafter Newhall Land hired him as a lobbyist. (I saw his contract listed in Newhall Land’s bankruptcy file. I wonder if they stiffed him?) However, Jeff I disagree with you entirely, that “… it’s clear his [Schwarzenegger's] take-no-prisoners approach in 2005 alienated many powerful interests and didn’t help the state much…” Many of us spent the Summer of 2001 in Sacramento, lobbying the Democrat-majority California Legislature on the CLWA bill. All but one of us concluded that the VAST MAJORITY of California Democrat Legislators are profoundly corrupt. For example, there was one Democrat skank from an area near Chino who would not even look up while we were testifying, and who voted with CLWA at the end of the hearing. (That’s why I’ll never give a penny to the California Democratic Party.) It was clear that the vast majority of the Democrat members of the three committees the bill went through had been bought off by favor trading or campaign contributions. THE REALITY IS THAT HAPPENS ALL THE TIME IN SACRAMENTO, WITH ALL BUT THE MOST PURE, PRINCIPLED DEMOCRAT LEGISLATORS. Of course, back in 2001 Santa Clarita’s Republican Assemblyman and Senator were clearly in the pocket of CLWA/NLF as well. We know NLF was involved because their lobbyist was at the legislative committee hearings, and one-less-recognizable of our group stood right behind the lobbyist and out then Assemblyman (not Cameron Smyth) and listened to a discussion of “what NLF wanted in the bill”. They got it. The reality at the Legislature in 2001 was that the Assemblymen and Senators who really cared about a potable water shortage in Santa Clarita were Republicans from the Central Valley. It is their ideas, far more sophisticated than ours, which found their way into the bill and which give Santa Clarita’s residents some small modicum of protection for their water supply today. Having been enlightened in person, that both the Democrat Governor and the Democrat Legislators had been “persuaded”, despite the Sierra Club and local Democrats’ opposition to the bill, we watched the California Democrat Legislators far more closely. I won’t write a boring dissertation on anti-progressive/anti-environment/anti-public health votes the California Democrat Legislators have taken, but suffice it to say that the largest single impediment to improving California schools’ success, by reforming the parameters of tenure, has been the Democrat Legislators. Public employees unions in California rule the roost. The interests of their members are far more important than even progressive public interests. In my view, Arnold Schwarzenegger became Governor of California based on a good faith belief that his machismo would induce the male macho Democrat legislators to be his buddies, and believing that they, as partners, would straighten out the state. His approach was NOT initially “take no prisoners”. Schwarzenegger sincerely tried to work with the majority Democrat Legislators. However, he could not overcome the fact that those Democrat Legislators’ puppetmasters had no reason to share power with him. Schwarzenegger could not overcome the public employees unions’ pressure on those legislators not to cooperate. Realistically, over time Arnold Schwarzenegger had his eyes opened, the same way we Santa Clarita Democrats did. So here we sit 9 years later, and the California Democrat majority in the Legislature, which is largely morally corrupt (at the very least) are even more intractable, because money is far tighter. They have to pander to the public employee unions all the more. The Democratic Party officials in Sacramento are all about covering up mistakes, indiscretions and incompetence by elected officials from their own party. (Funny, Attorney General Andrew Cuomo managed to bring prosecutions of elected officials arising from rip offs of the NY State Employees Pension Fund, but that didn’t happen in California. I know why.) As a result, my bottom line is that Arnold Schwarzenegger is like Robert E. Lee. He is an honorable man who fought for a cause, and lost. I wish more people understood that fact. That brings us to Meg Whitman. In contrast to Arnold Schwarzenegger, I consider her a clueless, egotistical lunatic for spending $140+ Million of her own money to get elected. If she is elected Governor, she will be walking into the same deadlocked circumstance as Governor Schwarzenegger faced. If Whitman really cared about California, she would have spent her $140+ Million to get Republicans elected to the California Legislature. That’s where the problem with “management” of California lies. She will accomplish nothing as Governor, in large part because the Democrat macho men who run the Legislature will no more want to deal with her than they want to deal with a spouse who is a shrewish fishwife in temperament. There will be less civility and absolutely no modicum of cooperation. Meg Whitman will experience gridlock the likes of which Arnold Schwarzenegger never saw. And Jerry Brown as Governor: The man I admired in the 1970′s is now just a tired old man. I was thoroughly unimpressed by his tenure as Attorney General. Just what did he accomplish to protect California’s open spaces or its public pension funds? Just what did he accomplish to protect Californians from toxic sites like Rocketdyne and Bermite? On civil law issues, Jerry Brown chased quixotic causes rather than using his powers to protect Californians’ tangible interests. If Brown is elected Governor I can only wish he surrounds himself with people far less evil than Gray Davis. However, I don’t count on it. Jerry’s boy, Maziar Movassaghi, is already head of the California Department of Toxic Substances Control. Maziar was Jerry’s personal assistant when Jerry was Mayor of Oakland. During Maziar’s tenure, with Jerry as his lawyer, they have fumbled a large number of toxic clean up issues. For example, Maziar and Jerry never made the LA Unified School District remove the toxic soil at the Carson-Gore Elementary School which was being built in LA. Instead, LAUSD built the multi-million dollar school on the toxic soil, and were willing to open the school with VOCs off-gassing into the class rooms. The VOC contaminated soil was only removed because a few intelligent parents knew enough to go to California Communities Against Toxics, to force the removal of the VOC contaminated soil AFTER the school was complete. (Your tax dollars at work.) Jerry’s boy Maziar has assigned a very disingenous, sleazy manipulator as project manager of DTSC’s most toxic and dangerous project, the heavily nuclear contaminated Rocketdyne property, whose contamination has blown onto and leaked into neighboring properties, including one part-owned by Santa Clarita’s favorite developer. Just two weeks ago, I had to suffer through 3 hours of incredible, disingenuous b.s. by “Jerry’s Boys” as well nasty shreiking from a DTSC “Public Participation Coordinator” who is one of Jerry’s earliest contributor/supporters in this run for Governor. I thought to myself, “This is what it is going to be like when Jerry’s people re-take the reins of managing state agencies. Professional Democrats manipulating state policy for the benefit of those who contribute to campaigns, and manipulating so that the party members never look bad.” I knew, in 2001, that California was hopeless. It’s more hopeless now. After a huge earthquake on the San Andreas, it’s going to be like a gigantic Haiti, in terms of having no political or economic ability to organize i

ReaderMamaOctober 20, 2010 at 4:36 pm

Thanks CS. Yet another strong argument for ignorance being bliss . . .

ScottEOctober 20, 2010 at 6:45 pm

“No, there’s too much. Let me sum up.” (cheesh)

RemStarOctober 20, 2010 at 9:54 pm

CS, I agree completely with your rant (“rant” in this case is a compliment and not a criticism). We’ve been ill served by the political leadership in Sacramento for decades. They’ve ruined California. The “state of our state” is likely beyond restoration. On this editorial you are right on the money.

CCOctober 21, 2010 at 7:35 am

Sound, fair assessment of what most private citizens feel about our representatives. Now what?

gregory molineriOctober 20, 2010 at 5:03 pm

The most compelling case this video makes is that candidates from this level up can do nothing more than spew Party line. The same advisors return each election cycle to insist that the same message (even to the exact word!) remains the only path to election. For this reason alone, I appreciate and respect what the Tea Party is doing. They have their zealots and they’re still trying to define their message but they are exposing this type of empty rhetoric from the well-entrenched Republican Party line. Republicans at the top don’t want this any more than they want a Democrat in office and neither party wants a real debate of issues. It’s cozy as it is and damn the American public anyway.

JayceOctober 25, 2010 at 10:36 am

I’d respect the tea party more if every time I went to a tea party website there wasn’t pictures of obama and a rope or some other racist crap in the pictures section. :-/

ThomasOctober 20, 2010 at 6:00 pm

Polls are all over the place. One poll today put Whitman only 2 points behind Brown.

FredOctober 20, 2010 at 6:17 pm

I don’t understand why people would want to vote for a dirty old hippy dressed up in a suit. Certainly Meg is fooling herself if she thinks she is going to shut down the unions, but Jerry Brown? Really?

ReaderMamaOctober 20, 2010 at 8:23 pm

I think Meg is a lot hippier.

Cheryl PhillipsOctober 20, 2010 at 9:25 pm

There’s really not a lot to say about our choices for Governor. It boils down to Meg had the balls to go on the John and Ken Show and take the hard questions – not saying she came across great – she didn’t, but Jerry Brown just plain never showed up – never came……………..Meg gets my vote.

RemStarOctober 20, 2010 at 9:59 pm

I was considering voting for Meg until she turned hard right in the primary against that other billionaire, particularly on the issue of illegal immigration (“I’ll be tough as nails”), only to find out she was hiding her own illegal immigrant problem. Meg forgot that she had to be an elected politician before she could become a political “hypocrite.” They are all aweful candidates, but Meg sickens me and I just can’t vote for her. Are these the best two people we can come up with? How sad for California.

ThomasOctober 21, 2010 at 5:26 am

The illegal immigrant charge seems to be a dead issue. And Gloria Allred? Please, does she even know what the inside of a court room looks like? Meg, you got my vote. You hired this lady through an agency, not directly, and when you found out the problem, you got rid of her AFTER you were already in the running for governor.

CCOctober 21, 2010 at 7:37 am

In an election deemed as lose /ose, I probably will vote for Meg if for no other reason than to prevent the Democrat legislature from having more of a free hand to stuff this State down the toilet. Simply pathetic

AlpinerOctober 21, 2010 at 8:59 am

The problem with Arnold is that he really was never a Republican. His Center became Center left. Brown is left, clean and simple. Meg says she is a Republican, but she also could be another Arnold — left leaning centrist. Still have a hard time with her not voting for 28 years. As a social conservative, there really is not a lot of choices out there. But Brown is a known entity and and far too liberal for me. Meg will get my vote.

MikeOctober 21, 2010 at 9:35 am

As a person who finds conservatism to be a liability, I think Arnold’s more essential problem was his inability to navigate Sacramento. He misunderstood the motivations other in the Capitol. It’s a fault that would have remained with him no matter which way his politics drifted. I perceive the same thing in Whitman, but even if I didn’t, I wouldn’t vote for her unless her opponent displayed a greater ineptitude. It makes for an interesting conundrum: Whitman’s politics are very close to a very large group of Californians, more so than Brown. Problem is, many of those people are swing voters who are more likely to be swayed by non-ideological issues like likability and competence. Neither is excelling in that regard, but it appears that Whitman is hurting more so.