The next Govenor

[The Big Dog]

A few thoughts....

** Feinstein is not going to run. She landed the chair of the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence this January, which is one of the most prestigious of the permanent committee chairs. She has lost races for governor twice already. She is also going to be 77 years old on her next birthday.

** Gavin Newsom is heartily disliked by the party movers and shakers.... the ones outside of San Francisco anyway. He is viewed, quite rightly, as an arrogant and self serving loose cannon.

** Jerry Brown has, beginning with his days as Oakland mayor, become remarkably libertarian across a number of issues. He has become strongly pro-business, all in favor of charter schools, and as Attorney General wrote a brief to the Supreme Court arguing in favor of incorporating the Second Amendment against the states.

** Jerry Brown has always been a supporter of << surprise >> less government and eliminating unnecessary government spending. Even when he was governor the first time.

** Jerry Brown is, as of today's results, polling 20 points ahead of Gavin Newsom. It's Brown's nomination to lose at this point.

Yes, Arnold has been exactly the disaster those of us who were paying attention and understood the people who were backing him (RINOs all) knew he would be. And yes, Maria absolutely wears the pants in the family. I have that on very good authority, up to and including appointments which don't get made without her sign off.

The three erstewhile Republicans competing at this point are all RINOs... Meg Whitman, former EBay CEO, Steve Poizner, currently state insurance commissioner, and former Congressman Tom Campbell.

To be absolutely honest, at this point, Jerry Brown is quite probably the best candidate in the race across the wide range of issues.

[subdjoe]

Oh, good. I was afraid that I was the only one who has seen that Jerry Brown isn't Gov. Moonbeam anymore. He is a true neo-conservative. Started off as a liberal who has seen that the socialism of the left just doesn't work. He still has a heart towards the left on social issues, but has a fiscal pragmatism to him. And a respect for the rights of the individual as opposed to the group. I wouldnt mind seeing him take it again if his stance isn;t just a sham.

[The Big Dog]

His record as mayor of Oakland would indicate that it's not a sham... not completely anyway.

I would not consider him to be a neo-conservative. He's not Jewish and he is still not particularly hawkish on defense issues, which are the two hallmarks of a true neo-conservative.

Given his somewhat libertarian, and pragmatic, stand on things I could almost see myself voting for him in the general over say Meg Whitman who is a dilletante, talks pie in the sky and is anti Amendment Two.

[heckheckle]

Newsome is out, by his own choice. I agree, BD, that Brown is the only sensible choice.

But who knows who will be thrown into the pile of candidates, by the time of the election.
Politics is Politics.

[capttankona]

I will never vote for Brown, ever. The man is a complete idiot. He does not even know what the 13th Amendment says, because I asked him about it.

I asked him specifically, "why don't we force prisoners duly convicted of a crime to work?"

He said it was a dumb question and that it is unconstitutional, then hung up the phone.

I was not able to reply, "it is not unconstitutional, in fact the constitution has a specific provision for just such a punishment in the 13th Amendment that abolished slavery."

Amendment 13 - Slavery Abolished. Ratified 12/6/1865
1. Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction.

2. Congress shall have power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation.