I Love You California

Been a while since I brought you any news from California so I thought I better keep everyone up to date. Let's see, last time we checked the unions were launching a televised assault on the Governator and he was getting slaughtered in the polls. That's pretty much been the story since then, only for the Guv' it keeps getting worse.

A new poll was out yesterday showing that 59% of Californians think the state is headed in the wrong direction versus 28% that felt it was headed in the right direction. Bad news for Arnuhld, I'm afraid, although I can't figure out why that many Califorinians felt the state was going in any particular direction at all. I guess the poll was one of those "either-or" situations.

And then, as if that wasn't bad enough, a new poll came out today showing that only 39% of Californians even want to re-elect the governor come 2006. That's not good and likely means that the special election the governor has called for November 8 (an election widely regarded as the "Arnold" referendum) is not going to be a happy time for the Big 'G' either. And when you combine the first poll with the second what really becomes clear is that Californians don't like the way things are going and for that they blame Arnold.

Now let me just say that I have a problem with polls sometimes, especially when they ask these overly broad questions and don't follow-up with more specifics as to what's really behind the numbers. That's why I decided to conduct my own poll and probe a little deeper. Of course I didn't feel like actually going out and asking complete strangers a lot of stupid questions, so instead I decided to just make up some number on my own (hey, if Richard Scrushy could get away with it, why not me?). They're good numbers, though, and I'm sure if I'd done an actual scientific type poll the results would have been just the same. Ok, on with the poll results.

Question 1: For those of you who believe that California is headed in the wrong direction, do you believe this is
a) Governor Schwarzenegger's fault
b) The California Legislatures fault
c) No opinion

The results here were not suprising. According to my sample, 99% felt it was Governor Schwarzenegger's fault with 1% having no opinion.

Question 2: For those of you who believe it is Governor Schwarzenegger's fault, how many of you know the name of
a) Your state senator
b) Your state assemblyperson

Now here the results were more interesting. 0% could name their state senator, 1% could name their state assemblyperson, and 99% answered Diane Feinstein.

Question 3: For those of you who believe it is Governor Schwarzenegger's fault, what is the major reason behind your belief
a) He's a special interest pawn
b) He doesn't understand the needs of California
c) He wants to fire all the police and nurses and throw our teachers and children out in the street.
d) He's on TV

Again, no suprise here. 5% felt he was a special interest pawn, 2% felt he doesn't understand California, 28% thought he was going to fire all the police and nurses and leave our teachers and children homeless (they've obviously been watching those union commercials), and 65% felt it was his fault because he was on TV.

Question 4: The Governor had proposed using retired judges to draw district lines in California. Do you support this proposal or are you opposed?
a) Support
b) Opposed
c) Huh? I hate thinking about this stuff. Can we go on to the next question.

Results were 0%, 0% and 100%, in that order.

Question 5: In order to bring California's budget into balance would you support
a) Cuts to programs
b) Raising taxes
c) Empowering the Governor to adjust spending in times of economic hardship to give him more flexibility in dealing with budget shortfalls.

No suprises here. Not in California anyways. 11% supported cutting programs, 89% supported raising taxes, and no one supports giving the government control over our money.

Question 6: For those of you who support raising taxes, how much more would you be willing to pay? Would you be willing to pay
a) 5% more in taxes each year
b) 10% more in taxes each year
c) 15% or more in taxes each year

Well, the only thing certain is death and taxes, and, of course, the results for Question No. 6. 0% supported a 5% raise, 0% supported supported a 10% raise, 0% supported a 15% or more raise, and 100% answered "No, I didn't mean MY taxes. What the hell is the matter with you?"

So there you have it. By the end of 2006 we'll have had 3 elections in 2 years and after all the dust has settled the unions will still be in control and everyone will still be blaming the guy whose face is on TV. If ever there was a case study in 1960's style Democratically run Big Government, it's California, where a problem is only a problem because we're not throwing enough money at it, and the more money we throw the bigger and more intractable the problem seems to become. Yes, let's have a cheer for our Great Society.

But before I go there is one more item on my agenda for tonight. I have a special guest here who would like to take a moment and say a little something to all my millions of readers. Mr. President, the blog is all yours.

Well thank you, there, uh, Tony. Let me first say 9/11...Now, as to this whole idea of a timetable. Well, it's just a...you know, you can't have a timetable. I think we're making progress...9/11...but there's more that needs to be done, and I think we've got a freely elected government out there now and we just need to...they have to provide for their own security. And they will, I think they've got about 168,000 ARVN troops on the ground out there and...

(Uh, Mr. President. Did you say ARVN?)

Oh, no, sorry, let me rephrase that. I meant to say they've got about 168,000 Iraqi Security Forces out there and, yes, our resolve is being tested, but we need to stay the course and see this Iraquinization process through. And I know the American people stand behind me on this and will not give in to terror.

Thank you Mr. President.

No, thank you. And don't forget - 9/11