"Ljwebb11" wrote in message
...
"Gunner" wrote in message
news
Its official, that tax and spend piece of dreck, Gray Davis, is
history. The California Elections board, just certified that the 1.2
million (not all counted by any means G) signatures are valid and are
grounds for the first Recall election in California history to proceed.

Now let the Democrap/Liberal/Socialist whining begin.
Neener neener neener.

Suggested Democrat hate topics:

Conservatives want to starve your children.
Conservatives want to deport all illegal aliens ...(well we do. G
Conservatives want to poison the land, water and air
Conservatives want a business friendly California. ( Bad Thing!)
Conservatives want to kick grandma out into the snow
( In Orange Country??????)
Darrel Isa bought 1.6 million votes,
(including a significant number of Democrat ones)
to recall Davis. by spending $1 millon dollars.

Im sure your spinmeisters can think up a few more...s******.


Sorry Gunner,

Gray Davis is an idiot--It would make absolutely no difference if he were
republican or conservative or whatever..........Still an idiot.........

Something to be said about those idiots that elected him--I doubt he
would
ever have been elected in any *other* state.......

=========

Looks like our Gov ( Gary Locke ) is not gonna run again........He hasnt
done too bad here, IMO.

One of the major contenders will be will be Christine Gregoire, our
current
AG........I would have some derogatory statements for her in regards to
some
taxation issues, but will refrain as I have a family member works as an
attorney in her office.



Be ready Gunner, the whining is really going to kick in now.
When I encounter those idiots who feel Davis should remain in power I ask
them
one question. I ask them if they feel they are undertaxed. If they answer
no,
then I say the state must be spending too much money then. Of course they
don't
want to admit to that and go off on some other tangent.


Les,

A: Im not Gunner.

B: As far as you know, I *could* have issues as to being
undertaxed---however unlikely G

C: I made no specific comments as to tax levels or spending.........nor will
I, excepting the below, and for the reason stated above......

=============

Here is a question :

Is it an ethical political policy to tax tobacco and liquor at a rate where
any additional taxation results in a net loss due to illegal (untaxed)
sales, *logically* because smokers and drinkers are a higher burden on
health care??

How about when the additional taxes collected are put into general funds
with no increased funding for health care?

=============

Generally speaking, a majority of smokers tend to be more uneducated and in
a lower income bracket than the median.......They are basically powerless
over their habit/addiction, regardless of the cost of cigarettes.....They
will put less food on the table for their children in order to buy their
cigarettes..........Defer buying insurance for their car......But they pay
more taxes..........And when it comes to health care, they are lumped in
with all the rest.......

=============

The attitude "Never give a sucker an even break" is not an ethical policy as
it regards to business, politics, or other, IMO.........

It is the cause of many of the biggest problems we face today........And one
would be a fool to think it is pervasive in any one political party and not
the others.

--

SVL