Schwarzenegger to run for governor

[Bluesman 0]

Fair enough toadlife. My statement wasn't specifically directed at this election but a statement about immigration in general.

BM

[ozanzac 0]

After reading the entire thread, I have come up with one conclusion: "I feel really sorry for Californians, I really, really do."

No matter who gets voted in, I can only see it being degrading to the state. For a state to have porn stars, dimwit actors and failed politicians as viable candidates for the leadership, everyone, no matter who you are, is gonna lose out.

Someone said they didn't mind if California turned communist, are things really that bad?

Now for someone to say that, it makes me look the Australian version of democracy and go "Shit, mayby compulsorarily voting isn't so bad afterall, it keeps most of the retards out."

Why do I say that?

Because only the intelligent dickheads get voted in, and if they do more bad than they do good, everyone gets pissed off and boots them at the next election.

After looking at your democracy, I like ours alot better, even though the next (my first) federal election, it appears that the racist rednecks are gonna gain ground from a political backfire.

*Sighs* Californians, I feel sorry for you. I really, really do.

[ralphwiggum 6]

After reading the entire thread, I have come up with one conclusion: "I feel really sorry for Californians, I really, really do."

No matter who gets voted in, I can only see it being degrading to the state. For a state to have porn stars, dimwit actors and failed politicians as viable candidates for the leadership, everyone, no matter who you are, is gonna lose out.

so what's the problem?

you said it correctly. this is a circus. IMO, GOP wouldn't mind dragging the state through this to achieve their goals or close to it. but then again, state recall election is possible since there were enough signatures as dictated by the law. maybe it's system's discrepancy, but its here.

Quote[/b] ]Someone said they didn't mind if California turned communist, are things really that bad?

nah. just some out of towners who has no clue on what to say, and pissed off that he can't have a slice of the pie. anyone who wants a piece but can't get one usually goes off in namecalling.

[toadlife 3]

For a state to have porn stars, dimwit actors and failed politicians as viable candidates for the leadership, everyone, no matter who you are, is gonna lose out.

They are not viable cadiadates. Though people against the recall would like to make you think so, the vast majority of voters are not going to vote for the porn star or the child actor, or any of the other rediculous candidates on the ballot.

Compulsorary voting sounds like a good idea to me. Dunno why we don't do it here.

[toadlife 3]

my prayers for your mother-in-law. maybe sue the car's owner since he gave the keys?

Thanks for the kind words. SHe's doing just fine. Her cast FINALLY comes off pretty soon, and most of the pins will be removed. Actually the owner of the van did have insurance. My mother in law got a sizable settlement, and we got a little over a grand for my wife's ordeal. I have no ideas what consequences the owner faced for giving over the car keys. Possibly none, since he had insurance.

oddly enough, Davis rejected several(2) laws that enabled such idea, until now, upon facing the threat of recall.

Which drives me crazy. Davis has absolutely no principals. Thats great that you have to pay taxes to get one, but it still is a slap in the face of the feds, and other states who accept California drivers liceses as proof of citizenship.

but for some, getting either umbrella or individual insurance is tough. running a small family run shop is not as profitable as it is(only 10% make it to 10 years) and they are stuck eitherway. not to mention that many low-wage jobs do not have a decent insurance.

I went without insurance for two years, while working at a minimum wage job. One time I got strep throat, and went to the doctor. He gave me a bunch of 'samples' which were enough to treat me, and I paid $40 out of pocket for the office visit. Almost all doctors will do this for people with no insurance.

Giving insurance to people who have low-paying full time jobs is a nice thought, but how do you to do it without having busuiness take advantage of it and dropping their employees insurance plans? I think any type of social health care program would need to be carefully implemented, or the government would end up having to pick up the tab for everyone.

[ralphwiggum 6]

the last debate smong major acdidate ran for an hour and half and just ended. and i must say out of 5 those who were present, i know 2 that i'm happy to watch get their ass kicked.

my view is that Arianna Huffington and Arnold Schwarzennegger both had the most intrusive, offtopic debate. Arnold would interrrup others reply in the middle and go on shouting match until he gets the voice, and Huffington would end up talking national politics and not CA related ones.

I say the biggest benefactor of this debate was Sen. McClintock who did not loose his composure and acted in style, and Green party candidate Peter Camajo also got some recognition. Bustamante did average, and seems to not gain anything from debate in terms of exposure, but didn't loose any either.

Arnold certainly needs to understand art of political debate and he could not refrain from making some negative comments. upon Huffington talking about corporate tax loopholes, he interrupts her and says, "your loopholes were enough to drive hummer through it." and for other candidates he just started hijacking it to the point where even the moderator got unhappy.

[ralphwiggum 6]

oddly enough, Davis rejected several(2) laws that enabled such idea, until now, upon facing the threat of recall.

Which drives me crazy. Davis has absolutely no principals. Thats great that you have to pay taxes to get one, but it still is a slap in the face of the feds, and other states who accept California drivers liceses as proof of citizenship.

if you put a man in desperate situation, he might do something totally unpredicatable and GOP can share responsibility for this.

and i say those other states need to get their policy renewed. how can CA driver's license be proof of citizenship? IT says that it is not in the back!

Quote[/b] ]

Giving insurance to people who have low-paying full time jobs is a nice thought, but how do you to do it without having busuiness take advantage of it and dropping their employees insurance plans? I think any type of social health care program would need to be carefully implemented, or the government would end up having to pick up the tab for everyone.

that's the point. as soon as gov't intervention happens, some firms will take advantage of it. the idea that should be employed is limited amoun of state support. you will get medical attention, but the amount will be limitted so that in desperate situation, you can get decent medical help, but there will be limits to it. kinda like unemployment bebefit.

[denoir 0]

Actuallly  - saying health care was rather insensitive. Anyone should get emergency care, no matter who they are. As for anything beyond that - NO, not unless they want to pay for it.

That's a very odd position, at least from a European point of view. Healthcare, emergency or otherwise is not a pleasure activity. People don't go to the doctor for the fun of it; they go because their health requires it.

So is it fair that a poor man can't afford a bypass operation while a rich man can? To me it's like restricting police protection to those that can pay for it.

Health care is a very basic social service that should be available to all. And (correct me if I'm wrong), I don't think that there's a single European country that hasn't got state-subventioned health care available for all.

Now, as I understand, the American logic is that instead of paying taxes for a state sponsored healthcare you keep your money and decide what to do with it (and pay directly to the hospitals). Now that's all fine and well from an ideological point of view, but in practice it does not work for many people that simply don't have the money. Plus medical costs can be absurdly high and can break even persons from the upper middle class.

I'll give you an example. I know a man who used to be a professor at Harvard. He was doing quite well and his wife had a well-paid job too. Then they got a kid that was born with both severe mental and physical handicaps. The kid needed constant medical supervision and they had to rebuild large portions of their house to accomodate his needs. After four years, they broke economically. They could simply not afford it. They lost their house and when they could not afford the supervision for the kid they had to quit their jobs. For a while it looked like they would end up on the street. They moved however to Canada where they managed to rebuild their life, thanks to the Canadian social security system.

Such a thing would be unimaginable in Sweden. If you get a handicapped kid, you can be sure that it won't cost you anything extra, much less break you economically. You'll get everything for free - the state will pay for any necessary rebuilds of your house, the medical supervision, transportation etc etc

And yes, we pay higher taxes to keep such a system up and running, but I'm more than happy to do so. It is still a very small minority of the people that need this type of help and if it means that they can get a normal quality of life, I'm more than willing to help financing it.

[toadlife 3]

Quote[/b] ]Now that's all fine and well from an ideological point of view, but in practice it does not work for many people that simply don't have the money...Plus medical costs can be absurdly high and can break even persons from the upper middle class.

Frivilous Malpractice lawsuits, and the fact that we subsidize the worlds perscription drug supply are the biggest reasons why medical costs are so high in the United States. Bush is trying to do something about the lawsuits. It's one of the few things I think he is doing right.

Sob stories about our 'unjust' healthcare system won't change my position. If we fully socialized healthcare, the problems with our healthcare system would just be passed onto the government, with all of their ineffeciencies. Perhaps if we reigned in the problems with our healthcare system, I would be more open to the idea of socializing it, but until then, I hold that it would only make it worse for everyone.

Oh and BTW - Canada's health care system is not better than then ours. It might be a little more 'fair' in some people's eyes, but that doesn't mean it's better. When you have to go on a waiting list for simple heart bypass surgery, then the healthcare situation sucks in your country.

Waiting in line for your heart bypass surgery -> death

Getting your bypass surgery immediately -> debt

I'll take the debt any day.

[Donnervogel 0]

Waiting in line for your heart bypass surgery -> death

Getting your bypass surgery immediately -> debt

I'll take the debt any day.

I've never heard someone had to wait on such an operation here in switzerland. If you're in a serious situation and the operation is more or less a standart thing (means it doesn't depend on some speacial organs or parts that are very rare or require a foreign surgeon) you get it as soon as possible. That means the only occasion you have to wait for the operation is when all surgeons are operating at the moment. About the costs you can negotiate after the operation with your health insurance company. It may end up that you have to pay parts or even the whole operation. Then you're in dept too. But normaly they will pay for you and you're not in dept.

The logic is more like "who needs it first gets it first". Nobody will refuse the operation because your operation isn't financed yet or something like that. It might only be delayed when all surgeons are occupied at the moment.

But there are waiting lists for bone marrow transplantation an such operations. Because it's very hard to get a contributor. But I don't think that easier in the US.

[denoir 0]

When you have to go on a waiting list for simple heart bypass surgery, then the healthcare situation sucks in your country.

But that's the point. You don't have to wait, regardless of your financial situation. Regardless if you are homeless or the king himself, you'll get that bypass right away.

And as I said, the price of that is higher taxes, but I think it's certainly worth it.

Of course there are some European countries that take this a bit too far - In Germany for instance women can get silicon breast implants paid by the state.

But generally speaking, normal healthcare should be free, just like the services of the police are free. It's just the country protecting it's citizens.

[Donnervogel 0]

In Germany for instance women can get silicon breast implants paid by the state.  

Yes but only if they can prove that their health (mental or physical) is affected or when they have some sort of defect they can get it. It's not that a hot chick can pump up her breasts on cost of the state because she thinks she's not pretty enough.

[toadlife 3]

Quote[/b] ]I've never heard someone had to wait on such an operation here in switzerland.

I was referring to multiple stories I've heard regarding Canada, not switzerland. Perhaps your system is free from, or has less of the problems ours has.

Quote[/b] ]About the costs you can negotiate after the operation with your health insurance company. It may end up that you have to pay parts or even the whole operation. Then you're in dept too. But normaly they will pay for you and you're not in dept.

Yeah - same thing in the U.S. Your life in in immediate danger - you get the surgery. If you have no insurance, you are stuck with the bills.

Quote[/b] ]It might only be delayed when all surgeons are occupied at the moment.

In the U.S. this type of situation rarely, if ever comes up, becaue there are plenty of surgeons. There are more surgeons because in a captitalistic medical system, surgeons make more money. Countless doctors from Canda have come down to the states to practice their trade because of the horrid pay they recieve in Canada

[toadlife 3]

In Germany for instance women can get silicon breast implants paid by the state.

- I'm speechless over that one.

[Donnervogel 0]

@toadlife

Yeah I know. But I'm not Canadian. I'm Swiss. It's just that we have a very expensive social system in Switzerland (far away from not having troubles). We have private health insurance companies but you're obliged to have one with minimal services by the law. The money for it is taken away from your loan before you get it. For exchange you get all the normal services from the health system. Low bills you usually pay yourself while the health insurance company will pay bigger (up to extremly huge) bills and costs.

Quote[/b] ] the U.S. this type of situation rarely, if ever comes up, becaue there are plenty of surgeons. There are more surgeons because in a captitalistic medical system, surgeons make more money.

Same here. We have plenty. The situation I've mentioned can come up in a hospital. But then you'll get trasferred to another hospital - because it's not purely capitalistic - and you get the same service and they can't refuse to take you. The socialized part is only that you can't refuse to have a insurance company. For the doctors it's quite the same as in the US. They work for their own profit and are not emplyed by the state. They only have to guarantee a basic medical service to everyone - and they can do it because they get the money from the insurance company either way. The trouble - if you get it - is between you and the insurance company on how much - if anything - you have to pay yourself.

EDIT: I should maybe add that even when you're unemployed/poor you have a insurance company and they will have to pay the mininmal services for you. The company takes the money from the contributions of other people that do earn money.

[ralphwiggum 6]

http://www.cnn.com/2003/ALLPOLITICS/09/28/recall.poll/index.html

Quote[/b] ]LOS ANGELES, California (CNN) -- Voters in the California recall election might be poised to kick Gov. Gray Davis out and vote Republican Arnold Schwarzenegger in, according to a CNN/USA Today/Gallup poll released Sunday.

When asked how they they would vote on recalling Davis, 63 percent of probable voters said they would vote yes, compared with 35 percent who would vote no.

In a separate vote to choose a replacement for Davis, Schwarzenegger was the choice of 40 percent of respondents.

Democratic Lt. Gov. Cruz Bustamante was the choice for 25 percent of voters polled, Republican state Sen. Tom McClintock received 18 percent.

eh, this ain't the first time CA made an actor a governor.

i'm somewhat dismayed by the fact that some non-comprehensive intrusive entertainer could grasp the governorship. let's see how he fairs in comparison with Ventura. If Arnold does become a governor and fail to close the budget deficit to 0 or turn it around with in 2 yrs i'm starting recall drive.

[blackdog~ 0]

Arnold Prank Call Contest...

http://soundboards.myrmid.com/

Come on, you know you want to.

[ralphwiggum 6]

Huffington withdraws from race

Quote[/b] ]LOS ANGELES, California (CNN) -- With her campaign support mired in the low single digits, independent candidate Arianna Huffington announced Tuesday evening that she is pulling out of the California gubernatorial recall race and will work to defeat it.

"I'm pulling out and I'm going to concentrate every ounce of time and energy for the next week fighting to defeat the recall because I realize that that's the only way now to defeat [Republican gubernatorial candidate] Arnold Schwarzenegger," the 53-year-old writer and media commentator said on CNN's "Larry King Live."

[Tex -USMC- 0]

Huffington withdraws from race

Quote[/b] ]LOS ANGELES, California (CNN) -- With her campaign support mired in the low single digits, independent candidate Arianna Huffington announced Tuesday evening that she is pulling out of the California gubernatorial recall race and will work to defeat it.

"I'm pulling out and I'm going to concentrate every ounce of time and energy for the next week fighting to defeat the recall because I realize that that's the only way now to defeat [Republican gubernatorial candidate] Arnold Schwarzenegger," the 53-year-old writer and media commentator said on CNN's "Larry King Live."

No surprise. She was obviously in it all along as an attack dog candidate; more interested in ruining her target's chances than actually participating in the democratic process. Good riddance to bad rubbish, I say.

[ralphwiggum 6]

on the other note, GOP decided to support Arnie.

there reason? Arnie can fix budget crisis.

upon asked about Arnie's pro-choice, pro-gay stance, the spokesperson started saying, "This meeting is about fiscal policy, not social issues."

[ralphwiggum 6]

http://www.nbc4.tv/politics/2520740/detail.html

Quote[/b] ]Governor Refuses McClintock's Debate Offer

Davis Still Wants To Debate Schwarzenegger

desperate McClintock hunting desperate Davis who is hunting Arnie.

[Tex -USMC- 0]

on the other note, GOP decided to support Arnie.

there reason? Arnie can fix budget crisis.

upon asked about Arnie's pro-choice, pro-gay stance, the spokesperson started saying, "This meeting is about fiscal policy, not social issues."

I don't think Arnie's such a bad pick for governor. Sure he's clueless about government service and is completely unqualified for the job, but he's got a very reassuring air about him- nothing like having a governor who can say, with a straight face "Ven I am go-eenk to Sahkrahmento, I am goink to pomp Sakramento opp!!!"- just imagine how he'll sound when he lets us know that California's budget shortfall just got its ass kicked. And if he'll just shut the fuck up, smile during photo ops, and let the professionals on his staff sort things out, things just might go well for California. I mean, it worked for Reagan, didn't it?

[Lt_Phoenix 0]

@ Oct. 01 2003,07:53)]I don't think Arnie's such a bad pick for governor. Sure he's clueless about government service and is completely unqualified for the job, but he's got a very reassuring air about him- nothing like having a governor who can say, with a straight face "Ven I am go-eenk to Sahkrahmento, I am goink to pomp Sakramento opp!!!"- just imagine how he'll sound when he lets us know that California's budget shortfall just got its ass kicked. And if he'll just shut the fuck up, smile during photo ops, and let the professionals on his staff sort things out, things just might go well for California. I mean, it worked for Reagan, didn't it?

I agree with Tex. If he's got a good staff to help him out, I reckon he'll manage allright.

I also think he'll add some new perspective if he gets the job. Not like tose other typical politician types that are stuck in their old ways.

[ralphwiggum 6]

problem is when the staff is out of touch, or the leader has no directional guidelines, it is no better than anarchy.

the problem that i see with Arnie's staffs are that they are replay of Pete Wilson's kids, and a figure head called "Warren Buffet". Buffet may have joined, but i see none of his idea put forth with his name tag on it. as soon as he mentioned property tax, he got warned with 500 situps

we all saw on national and international level a monkey can cause even if staffs are competent.

LA Times is reporting tomorrow morning that 6 womens are accusing Arnold of sexual harrassment decades ago. and i think no one is buying it, even me due to time of the news.

[hellfish6 7]

@ Oct. 01 2003,07:53)]I don't think Arnie's such a bad pick for governor. Sure he's clueless about government service and is completely unqualified for the job, but he's got a very reassuring air about him- nothing like having a governor who can say, with a straight face "Ven I am go-eenk to Sahkrahmento, I am goink to pomp Sakramento opp!!!"- just imagine how he'll sound when he lets us know that California's budget shortfall just got its ass kicked. And if he'll just shut the fuck up, smile during photo ops, and let the professionals on his staff sort things out, things just might go well for California. I mean, it worked for Reagan, didn't it?

I agree with Tex. If he's got a good staff to help him out, I reckon he'll manage allright.

I also think he'll add some new perspective if he gets the job. Not like tose other typical politician types that are stuck in their old ways.

I said the same thing when Bush got elected. "As long as he's got a good staff..."