Arnold for Governor

If so, we will be the laughing stock of hte world. We will have elected a former body-builder (and one must assume, based on what we know of the industry in the 70s, habitual drug abuser), and action hero movie star, famous for some of the most moronic movies of the last two decades.

We will have unseated, in a ballot that only required 1 million names, an elected Governor. He will have lost, between an elections, because he is unpopular--thus creating a precedent (depsite your blog) that Governors should never take unpopular decisions. We will have pushed direct, participatory democracy to an absurd level--in a way that would have profoundly alarmed the Founders.

We will have done all of this because an ambitious, rich, undistinguished rightwing businessman, and sometime Congressman, would have been unwilling to wait for the next election--and loose as he certainly would.

What good do you hold up from this? That he has the "smart" people behind him. By which you mean the cranks and ideologues at Hoover. That he has the "right" ideas. By which you mean pro-business, and socially moderate ones.

It is all very shaming. Once again, as they did in Florida, as they tried to do during the Impeachment Scandal, Republicans are trying to steal an election. That they will, as you say, probably succeed will be no good foundation for the future of the State.

Boy someone woke up on the wrong side of the crib. Even when you are agreeing with me you sound bitter and disgruntled. Not sure that this rant deserves a response, but can't resist:

First, as I've noted, I agree with you (though you make it so difficult to do so) that this is a bad precedent and pushes us too far in the direction of popular democracy, and away from the founder's ideas of representational government.

Second, you are too harsh on Arnold. Despite editing your second magazine covering business you seem to have an inherent disdain (envy?) of those that have been successful in industry and seem to be innately resentful of any movement to help people actually conduct business without the close intervention of governments. I choose not to be resentful of Arnold's success but see him as a classic American success story: an immigrant with a passion to leave a socialist, economically oppressive society comes to America to follow his bliss--and succeeds.

Third, your comments reek of elitism, of course, which is your prerogative. I realize that you believe that artists should create works that only someone who revels in curling up with a large volume of Proust would enjoy, but POPULAR culture has its merits. More worrying is your conception of who should govern. Despite using the Founders as a source of authority in your comment, you are implicitly advocating something they would abhor--the notion that our statesmen should be career politicians, aristocrats, with the right breeding.

Fourth, how silly of you to suggest that this is all the work of one individual who wasn't aided and abetted by the sheer, deep, and long incompetence and corruption of our governor.

Fifth, your comment about Hoover is born of pure ignorance and not worthy of any additional response.

Finally, yes, I mean pro-business and socially moderate. What's the alternative? I have yet to identify a coherent ideology that effectively advocates anti-business policies as being useful to anyone in society.

Perhaps my response was a little exaggerated, but I must make two final points:

1). It's Arnie! It's Arnie! We're going to look like morons. It's more embarrassing than electing Ventura. 2). Pace your remarks about the founders, the very many of the founders were most certainly elitists as you describe it: They went out of their way, through such mechanims as the elective college, to mediate the influence and power of the mob and direct democracy. Even Jefferson, that believer in the essential goodness of the ordinary American farmer, had reservations about the excesses of democracy.

I am a democrat and I voting for Arnold. How can anyone possibly do worse than the current office holder? This state has been corrupted by a do nothing government. Businesses are fleeing the state at an alarming rate as it is the most unfriendly state to do business in. We have the largest deficit in the union, the highest workers compensation rates in the nation, the highest taxes, housing costs, the list goes on and on. The trial lawyers, lobbyists, and corrupt politicians have ruined this state. It's time for us to have an outsider who isn't bought off by special interests. Wake up Democrats! Arnie is pro gay rights, pro choice, pro gun-control, he's liberal on social issues. He's the perfect candidate.

Arnold has some very serious qualifications to be Governor and it's unfortunate they are not being widely publicized. Arnold led the effort last year for Proposition 49 which expanded after school opportunities for children. It also sought to cut juvenille crime. I invite people to check out his credentials at our site in making up your mind: Arnold for Governor. BTW, it is NOT the official site. It does have plenty of information in case you want to know where Arnold stands on the issues.