The moment Arnold entered the ring, it was all over…much to the chagrin of Issa, the GOP millionaire who set the entire recall into motion so he could become governor without having to bother with messy things like the Republican primary.
And now we’re faced with the reality that eighteen other states have recall provisions. Now that wealthy politicos have seen how the process can be abused, you can bet that governing in those other states is going to be that much more problematic. When you govern, sooner or later you’re going to wind up making decisions that won’t be embraced by the populace. These are the tough decisions, the ones that separate the leaders from the tentative and cautious. But now any governor serving in a recall state is going to have to spend as much time watching his back as doing his job, because now–thanks to California–every year is an election year, and every decision is going to have to be scrutinized six ways from Sunday as to how it could backfire.
Look how quickly and emphatically the government can get things done when they’re sure voters won’t protest, such as the law against telemarketers…which, by the way, I think just might fly in the face of the First Amendment. I mean, isn’t this a classic example of congress making a law infringing? Not only does Congress not have the power to tell someone they can’t call someone else, but they specifically *don’t* have that power. Doesn’t matter. It’s a popular move, so they embrace it.
The California recall is a giant step toward making governing what it should never be: An incessant drive to win a popularity contest. And when one considers the words of Thomas Jefferson about a people getting the kind of government they deserve, well…’nuff said.
PAD
• 
VERY well-done analysis, Peter.
“Jon Stewart summed it up The Daily Show… when they were live and no numbers were available, and yet he said, ‘C’mon…you know Arnold’s gonna win.'” I think he also summed it up nicely in his interview with Hillary Clinton yesterday as people wanting leadership “even if it’s fictional character leadership.” I’m think I’m going to start using the expression “fictional character leadership” a lot.
My 2 cents on Do Not Call – This wouldn’t be a problem in the first place if legislation required that citizens opt IN instead of opting OUT. But this country has been rigged in favor of corporations and against citizens for, um, ever? So corporations wind up with more person-specific rights (including “free speech” rights, which are actually commerce rights in disguise the way they operate for corporations in reality) than citizens just about every time.
“I keep thinking about all the telemarketers that are going to be losing their jobs.” This sounds unfortunate on its face, Elie, but you need to remember that the telemarketing industry relies largely on underpaid or even unpaid (prison) labor so I wouldn’t feel all that bad if I were you.
“all I can think is in New York we just wouldn’t fall for this šhìŧ.” Ah, but we already have, Shana. Hillary Clinton (whom I genuinely like, by the way) is arguably far more qualified and experienced at politics than Ahnuld, but her election to the Senate was largely based on the same type of “cult of personality” that put Ahnuld into office.
As far as racist idiots getting fired from sports shows, well yeah, they have the right to be racist idiots, nobody cut off their mikes or anything, but you know, grow up and take responsibility for saying stupid things. Lots of people can get fired for saying inappropriate and stupid things on the job, why should TV presenters be any different?
Hillary Clinton (whom I genuinely like, by the way) is arguably far more qualified and experienced at politics than Ahnuld, but her election to the Senate was largely based on the same type of “cult of personality” that put Ahnuld into office.
I think it’s unfortunate that people who claim to stand for tolerance and inclusion and the link so blithely make fun of an immigrant’s accent. Surely there are sufficient substantive grounds on which to criticize Schwarzenegger without resorting to mocking how the man speaks?
The Edmund Burke quote was once brought up on “West Wing,” and Bartlet replied, “Yeah, and Burke was voted out of office five years later.”
Was it? I didn’t recall. I remember it from “1776”…
JLK
Hey, don’t forget that San Francisco has a large and homogenous population.
Oh, you mean the ones on Castro AND on Grant Avenue?
[Yeah, I know it was a joke, but it’s not much of one if you know the city….]
1. I really can’t see making politicians more accountable to the people who elect them as a bad thing. California’s recall standards seem to be exceptionally low compared to other states, but that doesn’t mean the recall itself is inherently flawed.
Also, it’s not like Davis’ unpopularity was a result of some bold, unpopular move he took; by most accounts, it was his utter inability to deal with the state’s financial and budget problems — indeed, an unwillingness to TAKE the kind of bold moves you think this will make the governors subject to more stringent recall standards less likely to take.
2. It’s not that voters wouldn’t protest the Do-Not-Call list, it’s that voters overwhelmingly support the Do-Not-Call list and they let their representatives know that. Like the recall, the DNC list is a case of the system responding to the citizenry. I’m not sure why you think this is a bad thing — aren’t people always saying they wish government would stand up for the people against financial and corporate interests?
I’m a Republican (some days, I suppose, mostly because I’m not a Democrat) and I desperately wish we’d had a recall procedure in Illinois so that we could have removed the previous Republican governor of the state who dámņëd near single-handedly destroyed the party at the state level through the general stench of corruption that emanated from his administration. I am ashamed to admit that I voted for him.
Someone commented that the Constitution and Bill of Rights don’t enumerate a “right to privacy”. However, the Ninth Amendment says:
The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.
This amendment has formed the underpinning for numerous Supreme Court decisions that acknowledge a right to privacy. You can look them up. 🙂
Interesting debates.
I dunno; I just find it sadly humorus that a candidate for wehat is arguably the fourth or fifth-highest political office in the country won a campaign during wheich his entire stumping seemed made up of four words, repeated ad nauseam: “Clean sweep,” and “I’m sorry.”
Funnier (and sadder) still is our societal fixation on current blame: It’s Davis’ deficit. It’s Davis’ mishandling of the energy crisis. Does no one remember just how deeply Pete Wilson was in bed with the energy boys?
I do, however, look at the bright sides.
First, unless there is sweeping Constitutional change, The Governator can’t get into the White House.
Further, we are spared from the stream of Scheissenegger-quality movies dumped on the theater each year.
On the subject of the Do Not Call lists …
Full disclosure: I did a couple years of telemarketing in college. After that, I worked for about five years in fundraising and development for nonprofits, and since that time have done incoming call center customer service duties for the federal government. I know how telephonic conversations should be handled. I’ve trained people in all of the above jobs, and I’ve written policy for two of them.
And my opinion of the telemarketing industry is šhìŧ; they have huge amounts of money at their disposal, but do nothing to TRAIN their people to conduct themselves well and give a human presence. I’m convinced that if telemarketers had sufficient (and it wouldn’t take much) training in how to act on the phone, rather than being insistently ordered to follow a stilted script, we wouldn’t hate the industry so much.
But I’m more than a little bemused at just how far we take this hate. I mean, come on–the sixteen-year-old who calls asking if you want aluminum siding has “raped your house”? A bit excessive.
Think on this: Why do we regard telemarketers so very differently than, say, door-to-door salesmen?
Where is the real difference between the two?
Not only does Congress not have the power to tell someone they can’t call someone else, but they specifically *don’t* have that power. Doesn’t matter. It’s a popular move, so they embrace it.
I disagree with you regarding this. I certainly think I have the right to tell somebody to NOT call me, whether it’s an angry ex-girlfriend yelling at me or a business interrupting me when I’m trying to watch Survivor.
You have the freedom to say whatever you want, and I have the freedom to kick you out of my house if I don’t like what you’re saying. This is just a logical outreach of the “kicking you out of my house” part, by denying telemarketers access to my phone number.
There are anti-harrassing laws in the books that makes it so that the angry ex-girlfriend can’t tie up my phone line by calling me all the time. If the angry ex-girlfriend does so, she gets fined and possibly sent to jail for harrassing and stalking. Why can’t the same laws apply to telemarketers?
I’m completely for the “Do Not Call List” law. Especially since it’s voluntary and you have to put yourself on that list.
Now, those dámņëd e-mail spammers need to be next. Honestly, people, I don’t need viagra to get hard, vicodin to deal with the pain of getting hard, or xanax to be happy about getting hard, and I’m not interested in those penile or breast enhancements either, and I’m pretty sure that turning my $6 into $60,000 the way you just described is illegal. Meh!
The Edmund Burke quote was once brought up on “West Wing,” and Bartlet replied, “Yeah, and Burke was voted out of office five years later.”
Was it? I didn’t recall. I remember it from “1776”…
It was there, too. Doctor Lyman Hall of Georgia, in describing Georgia’s stand on independence, said “Georgia is split right down the middle on this issue. The people are against it and I’m for it.” While ceding to the people’s desires for most of the play, toward the end of the second act he joins the “Yea” votes and quotes Burke to John Adams…noting with subtle irony that his vote was spurred by the sentiments of an Englishman.
(Can you tell I’ve been in a number of productions of that show?)
I believe it was brought up in the second season episode of “West Wing” entitled “The Lame Duck Congress.”
PAD
(Can you tell I’ve been in a number of productions of that show?)
And a fortunate man you are indeed to have been. I’d love to get a chance to do that sometime.
(My friends have, at various times, suggested me for Richard Henry Lee or Rutledge. Of course, everybody wants to play Franklin. 🙂 )
As usual, PAD and I are on opposite sides of the First Amendment argument. First, the Do not call list DOESN’T violate their First Amendment rights. They may STILL contact you via mail or in person, so the list doesn’t prohibit them from pitching their product, it just limits how invasive they can be while doing it. Whaty it comes down to though bascially is Privacy rights versus Free Speech rights. Your right to Free Speech ends where my right to privacy begins, at home. As I said, they still can exercise they’re Free Speech, but it will be more costly and inconvenient …for them. Sorry, the Constituition says nothing about Free Speech actually being …well…free!
insideman said: I’m betting the decent people who had their power bills tripled and quadrupled under Davis’ gross mismanagement don’t think so…
Well since the majority of the deregulation came under Wilson and Davis was trying to force the Bush adminstration to force Enron to return 9 Billion that they bilked from California. Bustamante is also opposing Enron in court to get the money back for California.
Considering this and Arnold’s meeting with Ken Lay on May 17, 2001, at the Peninsula Hotel in Los Angeles. I seriously doubt that the citizens of California will see the missing money.
http://www.gregpalast.com/detail.cfm?artid=284&row=0
I think there’s alot of things that are being left unsaid wrt Davis and California.
Mostly, that nobody is saying that he’s a scapegoat for the state’s problems. Ok, he’s done some stupid things, but nothing worse than any other politician.
But I’m given to wonder how a state with an economy larger than most third-world countries combined can have such a large shortfall.
Ponder that while also realizing that almost every other state is in the red.
Alot of Cali’s budget *has* to go to certain things as well.
There’s a number of other things that I think have contributed to California’s budget problems, and although I don’t recall how long Davis has been governor, they certainly don’t all fall at his feet.
Another note, alot of governors will have to look over their shoulders.
Why? Becuause it takes alot less people to bring somebody down with the threat of a recall than it does to put them into office in the first place.
Remember that Californians put Davis back into office just this past November. I can’t see how alot truly changed in the span of 6 months.
We have a President who has put our nation further in debt than it has ever been before as well.
Nobody’s screaming too loudly about that yet though.
Btw, XCel Energy raised the natural gas prices *80%* here in Colorado as of October 1st to cover costs.
Don’t think California is alone when it comes to obscene gas & electric prices. The problems are widespread.
People have the right to knock on my door.
People do not have the right to knock on my door, en masse, during dinner, when I have sign out front saying, “No salesmen or marketers, please!”, and after I have already spoken to these people to tell them this. That could be construed as trespassing.
When I’m walking down the street, people have the right to speak to me as I’m passing by.
They do not have the right to follow me continuously as I walk home after I’ve told them I don’t wish to speak to them. That could be construed as harassment.
Similarly, if I put my name on a list, a list that specifically tells telemarketers, “Okay, don’t call these people,” then that’s perfectly right. To say that the First Ammendment somehow gives these guys the right to call me is preposterous.
The Do Not Call List doesn’t tell telemarketers they can’t call people. It only tells them they can’t call those who have made it clear by signing up on the list that they don’t want to be called. People not on the list are still legally free game.
The List doesn’t infringe the telemarketer’s First Ammendment rights. Rather, it is I who am exercising mine by putting myself on it.
But…hey! Who nailed that the main villain on 7th season BtVS was the First after the opening episode, months before they revealed it? C’mon. Admit it. I had that cold. In the grand scheme of things it’s pretty trivial, but I said it way in advance and was right, so that should count.
Yeah, well, I correctly predicted that The Phantom Pirate Of Dragstrip Hollow was actually Old Uncle Al. See, he was trying to drive off Kindly Aunt Mildred from her farm so he could build a parking lot there and he made everyone believe he was a ghost with his holographic projector and about 12 million dollars worth of wire rigging. Which is ironic since, let’s face it, there’s no way he could possibly make that much money with a parking lot but there you are.
Would have gotten away with it too, if it hadn’t been for those dámņ kids and their talking dog which, frankly, is a lot more terrifying than any ghost could ever be but, again, there you are.
Skimming through the responses, others have touched on this concerning the Do-Not-Call List. But, here goes (again?)…
I, too, do not see it as an infringement upon free speech. Just as a door-to-door salesperson does not have the right to enter my home uninvited to peddle their wares, neither does the telemarketer have the right to “enter” my home uninvited to peddle his wares.
Now, to do away with the door-to-door salesmen, I can do one of two things: I can answer the door and then tell the salesperson, “No thanks…I’m not interested.” or, if I don’t even want to waste my time with that, I can post a “no soliciting” sign telling the salesperson, “Don’t even bother.”
With a telemarketer, prior to the “Do-Not-Call List,” my options were to either answer the phone and tell them, “No thanks…I’m not interested.”…or listen to their pitch anyway as I let my answering machine screen any incoming calls (or, for those of us who have Caller ID, screen any incoming calls that come from an unidentified caller). The list effectively gives those of us who want it the option of enabling us to post a “no soliciting” sign for telemarketers.
The Schwartzenegger situation won’t be repeated very easily. There were some unusual factors. First, Gray Davis was really, really unpopular. Second, the Democratic Party felt they had to support their candidate, no matter how lousy he was; their only alternative was Davis’s assistant. Third, the vote for Schwartzenegger had a lot of support from a growing faction across the country; the people who feel that “anybody but career politicians” can do a better job than any traditional party candidate. And fourth, Californians on the average are dumber than the people they mocked during the 2000 election, my native Floridians and their hanging chads. Don’t feel so superior now, do you?
Natural cure for impotence http://www.impotence-male.us Sure-Erect-Pills
Don
This is one of the best sites I have ever found. Thanks!!! Very nice and informal. I enjoy being here.
Excellent work! A site very interesting and design top-level. Thanks!
This is a cool site! Thanks and wish you better luck! Brilliant but simple idea.
Perfect site! Anything superfluous, all is laconic and beautiful. Thanks!
Sehr guten site. Alles arbeitet deutlich(klar), schon eben storungsfrei. Wer machte? Vielleicht vom Weg?
Don
jonny
jonny