They're starting with the easiest one first.
In the first political fallout from last week's vote to raise the gas tax in California, opponents are trying to recall a rookie lawmaker who voted for it.
Carl DeMaio, a talk radio host and former city councilman in San Diego, said Tuesday that plans are moving forward to launch a recall of Sen. Josh Newman, D-Fullerton, who voted for the $52 billion road repair package, paid for by fuel taxes and registration fees, just four months after he took office.
"This is the right strategy. There's consensus on it. And we are moving forward," DeMaio said.
While the gas tax is the impetus of the action, DeMaio said he and others in the nascent coalition to oust Newman are primarily setting their sights on the Democratic Party's two-thirds supermajority in the Legislature.
http://www.sacbee.com/news/politics-government/capitol-alert/article144036464.html
Won't they just be replaced by more democrats?
Quote from: tac on April 14, 2017, 10:17:51 AM
Won't they just be replaced by more democrats?
GOP? Same thing. :biggrin:
Nah, this is TEA pushing the recall.
Quote from: Solar on April 14, 2017, 10:22:16 AM
GOP? Same thing. :biggrin:
Nah, this is TEA pushing the recall.
Some yes. Turning California is going to take a few years.
Quote from: The Boo Man... on April 14, 2017, 07:30:50 PM
Some yes. Turning California is going to take a few years.
After the Oroville dam catastrophe, Moonbeams Bullet Train to nowhere, and now a 12 cent per gallon tax on all fuel etc. etc. etc, the Dims are begging to get kicked out of office.
Only an incompetent fool could lose to a Dim in this climate.
Quote from: Solar on April 14, 2017, 08:21:34 PM
After the Oroville dam catastrophe, Moonbeams Bullet Train to nowhere, and now a 12 cent per gallon tax on all fuel etc. etc. etc, the Dims are begging to get kicked out of office.
Only an incompetent fool could lose to a Dim in this climate.
Don't underestimate the number of "incompetent fools" that are out there. THEY ARE EVERYWHERE! :lol:
But, but, but...if California goes Republican, then there goes all those wetback gardeners, pool attendants, farm workers and concrete workers we need! We'd have to pay full wages!
Quote from: quiller on April 15, 2017, 04:08:45 AM
But, but, but...if California goes Republican, then there goes all those wetback gardeners, pool attendants, farm workers and concrete workers we need! We'd have to pay full wages!
I doubt it will go GOP only because of the Gerrymandered districts, but to yank the Supermajority status from the Marxists would stop their ability to arbitrarily raise taxes the way they're doing.
Twelve cents a gallon is beyond ridiculous, aside from the fact that for the poor, an extra stolen buck every time they stop to get gas is akin to robbery.
I can afford 12 cents a gallon, but I know half the state will struggle with it.
Quote from: Solar on April 15, 2017, 05:12:04 AM
I doubt it will go GOP only because of the Gerrymandered districts, but to yank the Supermajority status from the Marxists would stop their ability to arbitrarily raise taxes the way they're doing.
Twelve cents a gallon is beyond ridiculous, aside from the fact that for the poor, an extra stolen buck every time they stop to get gas is akin to robbery.
I can afford 12 cents a gallon, but I know half the state will struggle with it.
How many seats need to be swapped, just to be one under the 60% rule or however it's structured? It can't be that difficult to find the weakest equivalent number of Democrats, refine the attacks and defeat them! The question is, is there the
will, what with Silicon Valley, the Bay area and most of LA being so ultra-liberal and ultra-rich?
Quote from: quiller on April 15, 2017, 05:25:39 AM
How many seats need to be swapped, just to be one under the 60% rule or however it's structured? It can't be that difficult to find the weakest equivalent number of Democrats, refine the attacks and defeat them! The question is, is there the will, what with Silicon Valley, the Bay area and most of LA being so ultra-liberal and ultra-rich?
I think we only need three seats to ruin their veto less Supermajority.
Quote from: Solar on April 15, 2017, 06:28:24 AM
I think we only need three seats to ruin their veto less Supermajority.
Three can be done. Just dig into their true backgrounds and not their PR handouts.
http://www.sfchronicle.com/crime/article/BART-takeover-robbery-50-to-60-teens-swarm-11094745.php
BART takeover robbery: 40 to 60 teens swarm train, rob weekend ridersQuoteA recent string of robberies on BART trains took a frightening turn when dozens of juveniles swarmed an Oakland station over the weekend and commandeered a train car, forcing passengers to hand over bags and cell phones and leaving at least two with head injuries, witnesses told the transit agency.
The incident — the first of its kind in recent memory — occurred around 9:30 p.m. Saturday at Coliseum Station.
What was that tax increase for? Passengers or robbers or ??? And the Gov. wants to build more train lines...?
Quote from: Hoofer on April 24, 2017, 02:42:44 PM
http://www.sfchronicle.com/crime/article/BART-takeover-robbery-50-to-60-teens-swarm-11094745.php
BART takeover robbery: 40 to 60 teens swarm train, rob weekend riders
What was that tax increase for? Passengers or robbers or ??? And the Gov. wants to build more train lines...?
No. He wants to build more train lines than go billions over budget and never get finished.
Quote from: Hoofer on April 24, 2017, 02:42:44 PM
http://www.sfchronicle.com/crime/article/BART-takeover-robbery-50-to-60-teens-swarm-11094745.php
BART takeover robbery: 40 to 60 teens swarm train, rob weekend riders
What was that tax increase for? Passengers or robbers or ??? And the Gov. wants to build more train lines...?
Is anyone surprised no one was armed? That's because Bay area rats, er city residents aren't allowed concealed carry.
Talk about easy targets.
Quote from: Solar on April 24, 2017, 08:09:13 PM
Is anyone surprised no one was armed? That's because Bay area rats, er city residents aren't allowed concealed carry.
Talk about easy targets.
That's really smart! Rising crime rate, so take the guns out of the hands of law-abiding citizens, criminalizing those who try to defend themselves! Gotta love this California logic.
Quote from: Hoofer on April 25, 2017, 07:30:53 AM
That's really smart! Rising crime rate, so take the guns out of the hands of law-abiding citizens, criminalizing those who try to defend themselves! Gotta love this California logic.
Not Ca logic, most of the state still has concealed carry permits, just the lib run areas don't trust the honest working man, nor do they believe they are capable of protecting themselves or the innocent around them.
Quote from: Solar on April 25, 2017, 07:58:45 AM
Not Ca logic, most of the state still has concealed carry permits, just the lib run areas don't trust the honest working man, nor do they believe they are capable of protecting themselves or the innocent around them.
Imho, Libs pass laws to prevent citizens from protecting themselves not because they do not believe they are capable, but because they believe the citizens are capable. If the citizens were not capable of defending themselves, it would not matter if they were armed or not, they would still need the government for protection, and the government could still pick and choose who gets the protection. Libs want that right to defend taken away from citizens who can defend themselves, no lib has ever said armed gangs are a problem and should be disarmed. Citizens who can protect themselves will not rely on the government to protect them and will vote for more individual rights, and what is ironic, libs don't care if the citizens get hurt or killed as long as they are in office. We are the problem for libs, not the gangs. I laugh at them when I hear how the libs are concerned about OUR guns getting stolen and getting to the wrong hands, hell they are worried those guns might be used on them.
Quote from: s3779m on April 25, 2017, 02:20:02 PM
Imho, Libs pass laws to prevent citizens from protecting themselves not because they do not believe they are capable, but because they believe the citizens are capable. If the citizens were not capable of defending themselves, it would not matter if they were armed or not, they would still need the government for protection, and the government could still pick and choose who gets the protection. Libs want that right to defend taken away from citizens who can defend themselves, no lib has ever said armed gangs are a problem and should be disarmed. Citizens who can protect themselves will not rely on the government to protect them and will vote for more individual rights, and what is ironic, libs don't care if the citizens get hurt or killed as long as they are in office. We are the problem for libs, not the gangs. I laugh at them when I hear how the libs are concerned about OUR guns getting stolen and getting to the wrong hands, hell they are worried those guns might be used on them.
Despite Feinstein's abhorrence of our First Amendment, she packs a concealed piece while advocating for gun confiscation.