60 Comments

Ann:

Angelides must be whining and wheedling the CTA to pump money into his campaign. There isn’t anything he won’t promise them now.

Mar 30, 2006 - 2:34 pm Barbara:

“The respective Democratic and Republican leaders of the California State Senate and Assembly have just been meeting ..”

I just got a Sac Bee Alert at 2:00 pm, that Nunez has taken Arnold to task for his failure to CLEARLY state that he supports the McCain-Kennedy earned permanent residency/citizenship track. GOOD for the Speaker! Arnold should not be able to play games on this …if he thinks McCain-Kennedy is amnesty like Sessions and others then he should say it NOW…

Mar 30, 2006 - 2:50 pm Bill Bradley:

And this has something to do with infrastructure?

Mar 30, 2006 - 3:07 pm Julia Rosen:

Hey Bill, you should update and include our big lawsuit win. You should have gotten the release, but there is more here. Arnold could owe $25 million in fines out of the whole deal. The judges weren’t very happy that they decided to break the law because they felt like it.

Mar 30, 2006 - 3:09 pm Barbara:

Mr. Bradley, I took Nunez statement to mean that he was addressing the “infrastructure of California’s soul.”.. we are not just about roads & levees…

Mar 30, 2006 - 3:13 pm CA Dem:

Seems like in the course of a couple of days, Phil Angelides has gone from being the frontrunner to the latest Democratic disappointment. Phil is evidently so annoying that he has to have his daughters do his ads for him. Unfortunately, “elect our dad” isn’t going to cut it. Neither is being the “Anti-Arnold.” We need a candidate who is going to solve problems, not create more of them by selling out to every union that comes his way.

Mar 30, 2006 - 3:25 pm Eli Jacks:

So let’s get this straight…

Steve Westly is applauded for (finally) investigating a system that has been a failure for several years now (basically his entire tenure of office). The man is simply doing his job (again, finally). Yet, there’s no mention of his failure to investigate First Five (while I believe there was no wrongdoing, there probably should be an investigation).

Angelides is slammed for doing what every politician ever has done - propose a policy without a clear funding mechanism. And a good proposal at that. My girlfriend is a first year teacher in a public school. She can’t even think about purchasing a house in San Jose on her salary, at least in part because she’s got loans to pay off. She also hardly gets any support from her school or her district to do innovative things in the classroom that will positively reach the kids and actually make a difference in their lives. Hell, at least Angelides is proposing things. We’re learning where he stands and how he’d govern. We’ve not had one policy proposal from Westly in weeks and he’s done nothing in office to point to that will show us how he’d govern, and none from Schwarzenegger since the State of the State.

I thought this was the blog of a journalist, not the Westly cheerleading section.

Mar 30, 2006 - 3:29 pm Bill Bradley:

You know, I have a policy of allowing handles for commenters. And you are clearly, shall we say, even with the fake handle, an Angelides partisan. Sorry that I have to note in passing that Phil has not identified a funding source for his latest spending proposals. (If you think that is a slam, you have another think coming.)

If you were not such an obvious partisan you would recognize that that is, you know, unavoidable. In this little thing called reporting facts. Inconvenient though they may be.

Mar 30, 2006 - 3:38 pm Ann:

The Angelides hacks see their pork flying out the window and are absolutely beside themselves.

Mar 30, 2006 - 3:48 pm Bill Bradley:

Incidentally, “Eli,” Westly has put some out policy proposals that I haven’t bothered to cover. So much for your theory. But never fear, I am sure they are in your files.

Mar 30, 2006 - 3:50 pm Bill Bradley:

The truth of the matter of is that neither Democratic candidate is doing much in public. The policy proposals of either camp I don’t take very seriously since they are generally so much campaign boiler plate totally divorced from the news flow reality of what is happening in government.

Did either candidate weigh in on the great infrastructure policy debate?

No.

Not until pressed to do so. And then only in the most cursory of manners.

I think both candidates have been deficient.

And as for the very prepared Phil Angelides. Well, nothing to say on the great infrastructure debate, which should be his metier given his background as a developer and state treasurer. Nothing to say on immigration, even with the massive rallies around the country, until cornered in a radio station studio in San Francisco.

If I were going after Phil Angelides, believe me, you would know it.

Mar 30, 2006 - 3:55 pm Phil:

Maybe it’s time to have folks actually sign up in some sort of fashion that locks them into their “pen” names?

The “Charlie,” “Foof,” and “Eli”s of this world are getting tiresome…

Mar 30, 2006 - 4:02 pm Bill Bradley:

“Charlie,” not to surprise you or anything, is an aide to Rob Reiner who was posting from Rob Reiner headquarters. No investigation necessary there. It ended with him following my instruction to confess his sins to Rob.

Mar 30, 2006 - 4:08 pm V. Beirko:

Bill, I think you should hammer these guys. Think of it as toughlove. You will only make them stronger and better able to deal with the oppo storm Arnold & Co. will employ.

I can’t wait to see the first debate. But if it airs the same time as 24… Well, I’ll just have to read about it later.

Mar 30, 2006 - 4:36 pm Barbara:

“Governor Schwarzenegger has proclaimed tomorrow’s Cesar Chavez Day a day in advance”

It is a STATE HOLIDAY …he had to proclaim it today - his staff like all state workers are off tomorrow…Susie will be able to spend the whole day on his campaign without anyone questioning if she is doing campaign work on our tax payer dollars…Arnold should tell us where he stands on McCain Kennedy…

Mar 30, 2006 - 4:39 pm V. Beirko:

Is the governor planning any Chavez-related activities for tomorrow?

Mar 30, 2006 - 4:45 pm Barbara:

V. Beirko: Wonderful question!!! I wonder what his “public” schedule says?

Mar 30, 2006 - 4:47 pm Bill Bradley:

Barbara, please read the entire paragraph before commenting on it. You don’t get the joke when you don’t hear the punch line.

Mar 30, 2006 - 5:04 pm Barbara:

I got the joke maybe someone else has troule with a joke

Mar 30, 2006 - 5:07 pm Bill Bradley:

Oh, I know what the joke is. That state workers have to be notified in advance to take yet another holiday.

Mar 30, 2006 - 5:11 pm Julia Rosen:

Why did it take Weintraub and everyone else so long to figure out Joe’s role at the Alliance?

Mar 30, 2006 - 5:17 pm Barbara:

Well Mr. Bradley …whatever…OR possibly, Arnold is little more than a JOKE, proclaiming tomorrow’s Cesar Chavez Day a day in advance…when he won’t tell us where he stands on McCain-Kennedy…and his consultants could be plotting a “Wilson”….

Mar 30, 2006 - 5:23 pm AthlonGuy:

Cesar Chavez was against illegal immigration for awhile. The agribiz was aggresively importing cheap labor to undercut Chavez’s workers here. Chavez later stopped complaining about the cheap labor, once he discovered his celebrity being Mexican was more fun. In 1969, he even led a march down to the border in protest.

Sen. Feinstein with Fabian Nunez at her side said this shocking thing today:
10 to 12 million undocumented immigrants have come here legally.

Mar 30, 2006 - 5:29 pm Bill Bradley:

Julia, I don’t know. I didn’t know he was chairman of ABC, either.

Athlon, Cesar Chavez was against illegal immigration for a very long time, since it provided the growers with an endless pool of strikebreakers.

Mar 30, 2006 - 5:40 pm Barbara:

Even if DiFi said this… she obviously mis-spoke. She and the other Senators are working around the clock and are exhausted and it is tense situation with people like Sessions providing disinformation at every opportunity, and Frist putting a gun to everyone’s head because he wants an enforcement only bill to prevail for PRESIDENTIAL political reasons only…DiFi has made an enormous contribution with amendments criminalizing the building of a tunnel and now this pilot program amendment to McCain - Kennedy for agriculture workers to work legally..

Mar 30, 2006 - 5:42 pm Eli Jacks:

I’m not “Charlie” or “foof.”

I’m Eli. And I am a Phil Angelides supporter. He’s the most experienced of the candidates, and the best choice for California.

Bill, I really don’t want to start a fight with you or the other readers here, but this board has shown a distinct bias against Angelides and in favor of Westly. Various of the posters here have expressed support for Westly, so I’m doing the same, but for Phil, the better candidate.

And I’d also like to point out, that you can’t have it both ways. You said, “Westly has put some out policy proposals that I haven’t bothered to cover.” And “The truth of the matter of is that neither Democratic candidate is doing much in public. The policy proposals of either camp I don’t take very seriously since they are generally so much campaign boiler plate totally divorced from the news flow reality of what is happening in government.”

You can’t say that they’re not doing anything, when you admit that they’re putting out policy proposals (whether you like them or not).

And the fact is that Westly hasn’t put out anything policy-wise in weeks. He’s launched new commercials and released an internal poll, and announced an endorsement (which was actually a dual endorsement), but no policy proposals.

And even if what Phil is putting out is, as you affectionately say, “boilerplate,” at least we’re getting a glimpse of his principles and priorities for the state. And that’s significantly more than we can say for the “stealthy” Steve Westly, or the consumate flip-flopper Arnold Schwarzenegger.

Mar 30, 2006 - 5:50 pm Bill Bradley:

Well, Eli, you are wrong. The Angelides proposals are no better than the Westly proposals.

And to be perfectly frank about it, since you insist, I have known Phil for many years and I am surprised by his inability to rise to the challenge of running for governor. He dodges questions, fails to articulate positions on issues which he should own given his background — infrastructure — EVEN WHEN THEY ARE THE MAIN ISSUE IN THE STATE, and seems to have receded from what I thought was his level of preparation for this project.

Mar 30, 2006 - 5:59 pm Eli Jacks:

Bill, you said, “The Angelides proposals are no better than the Westly proposals.” That may be your opinion, and that’s fine, but you can’t deny that Westly hasn’t put anything out recently, at least not policy-wise.

Check out his website: On the “What’s New” part, the only policy proposal, is the one at the bottom of the page about making community college free. Click the link, and it’s date January 30. That’s two months ago. And you guys on this board refer to him as being stealthy - there’s nothing going on.

Angelides’ policy plans at the very least help us get to know him better as a candidate, and that’s a good thing, like them or not. I happen to like them, you happen to think they’re boilerplate.

Mar 30, 2006 - 6:16 pm Bill Bradley:

That is simply not true. I have received a number of policy proposals from Westly’s campaign much more recent than that.

If you think this is an issue, you ought to take it up with his webmaster.

Mar 30, 2006 - 6:20 pm Joel Bush:

Angelides supporter? Say it’s not so! Just two month ago, Mr. Jacks was on our blog talking about his status as a “undecided.” Oh how times change.

He was more entertaining to watch when we had our old blog up because the only people reading the blog were us and the Angelides campaign. We also didn’t require a login, so he would post as a few different people - usually “undecided” as well…not realizing that I could tell it was coming from the same place.

No big suprises, but it was funny to watch what they would come up with.

Mar 30, 2006 - 6:20 pm Eli Jacks:

Joel, you’re right. I was undecided then. But I’m not anymore. Partly because I don’t like the fact that you guys censor posts on your blog. Credit to Mr. Bradley who doesn’t condone censorship.

Mar 30, 2006 - 6:25 pm Eli Jacks:

Joel, the other thing I didn’t like about your blog, was that you had staffers posting on your blog without identifying themselves as staffers.

Mar 30, 2006 - 6:27 pm Eli Jacks:

And yes, I was looking at/posting on the Westly blog then, I’ve since stopped, because, as I mentioned before, I’ve been closely following this campaign for some time now.

Mar 30, 2006 - 6:29 pm Eli Jacks:

As for the infrastructure bonds, Bill, try a Google search for “Angelides Infrastructure” and see what turns up. I found a few things:

“California State Treasurer Phil Angelides, Assemblymember Dave Jones
(D-Sacramento), Sacramento County Supervisor Roger Dickinson, and environmental leaders today called on Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger and members of the California Legislature to derail the State’s path toward sprawl, air pollution and traffic congestion by adopting a “green” infrastructure bond plan that supports smart growth, preserves California’s environment, and strengthens California’s economy for generations to come.”
http://www.treasurer.ca.gov/news/releases/2006/20060223_green.pdf

“The State Treasurer’s Office has conducted an initial review of Governor Schwarzenegger’s infrastructure proposal and found that it does not live up to its own stated commitments, contains misstatements of financial and other information, and leaves many significant questions unanswered.”
http://www.treasurer.ca.gov/news/releases/2006/20060109_infrastructure.pdf

(I’ll admit I’ve got no html skills)

Mar 30, 2006 - 6:31 pm Nick Velasquez:

We reserve the right to block blog postings which are patently offensive, those containing blatant lies about Steve Westly, or obvious hatchet jobs from Phil’s shills (i.e “Eli”).

Mar 30, 2006 - 6:49 pm Eli Jacks:

Nothing I ever posted on the Westly blog was offensive, contained a lie about Steve Westly (or anyone else for that matter) and I’m not a Phil shill, just a supporter, and, when I was posting on your blog, I was undecided, and I identified myself as such.

And frankly Nick, I’m offended by the way that you treat California voters. You’ve attacked others on this blog before. If you reflect your boss, then California really would be in trouble if Steve Westly is elected.

Mar 30, 2006 - 7:04 pm Nick Velasquez:

Eli,

Thanks for the laughs.

Best,

Nick-

Mar 30, 2006 - 7:05 pm AthlonGuy:

There is not enough information to know this for sure. I still have no clue where Westly stands on giving licenses to illegals. (Or documentation to the undocumented, if you prefer.)

> California really would be in trouble if Steve Westly is elected.

Mar 30, 2006 - 7:28 pm Bill Bradley:

I don’t know his position on that. You know, I have talked with Arnold about that issue, although not recently. He has never been against drivers licenses per se. The current state of play on Arnold’s position there is that he favors giving licenses to illegal immigrants so long as they look different from the regular license, can’t be used for other purposes, and are in line with yet to be promulgated federal security guidelines. The people who are against any drivers licenses for illegal immigrants are going to be disappointed in the end by the governor.

Mar 30, 2006 - 7:33 pm Bill Bradley:

Eli, I appreciate your position. Phil Angelides is a very impressive guy, and a great chairman of the Democratic Party, who may well end up as the next governor. I hope that he emerges from the relative cocoon that both Democratic candidates seem to be in.

Mar 30, 2006 - 7:39 pm gail:

this blog has become a food fight and/or sand box. grow up y’all.
seems to be a metaphor for our politics–childish and immature.
for those of us who love california and realize what it once was and could be, it is a shame that the political establishment can’t see past their own self interest and the day to day political advantage that motivates them.
35 million people are being let down every day.
and so it goes.

Mar 30, 2006 - 7:47 pm Bill Bradley:

Oh, believe me, there are FAR worse. Trust me on that.

Mar 30, 2006 - 7:49 pm Bill Bradley:

Comrade Bierko, you may have a very good idea there.

Mar 30, 2006 - 9:19 pm Barbara:

Perhaps this is a new idea. Keep your friends close and your assassins closer.

Not such a new idea ….

Sun Tzu - “Keep you friends close, your enemies closer” a line used in a lot of films …
Or did I miss another punchline?

Mar 30, 2006 - 9:55 pm Bill Bradley:

I know. I changed it.

Mar 30, 2006 - 10:00 pm PrestoPundit » Blog Archive » Schwarzenegger Honors Cesar Chavez:

[…] proclaiming it “Cesar Chavez Day”, but neglects to honor Ronald Reagan on the day California has set aside each year as Ronald Reagan Day. This tells you all you need to know about where the Schwarzenegger administration is today. […]

Mar 30, 2006 - 10:13 pm Adam:

Eli: “And frankly Nick, I’m offended by the way that you treat California voters. You’ve attacked others on this blog before. If you reflect your boss, then California really would be in trouble if Steve Westly is elected.”

This is bunk. I can speak as someone who is truly undecided. Nick has been nothing but friendly and open minded. I have been critical at times of the Westly campaign, and Nick has responded graciously.

Eli, it’s good that you stick up for Phil. But stick to actual issues, please.

Mar 30, 2006 - 10:15 pm Kyle:

Time for a hug!

Mar 31, 2006 - 12:28 am Nick Velasquez:

I am happy to share with you where Steve Westly stands on the issue of “driver’s licenses” for the undocumented.

Controller Westly supports Senator Gil Cedillo’s Senate Bill 60 (the current version). Under SB 60, the state would provide qualifying undocumented workers in California with a driving certificate that is in full compliance with the federal Real I.D. Act signed into law by President Bush and meeting two key security concerns - that the driving certificates be easily distinguishable from regular driver’s licenses, and that they can be used for no other purpose.

Interestingly, the current version of this legislation actually addresses the security concerns expressed by the Governor in previous years. Yet the Governor continues to oppose this legislation. His latest rationale is that he can’t sign the bill until the federal government has issued guidelines for implementation of the act at the State level. Frankly, this is viewed as a canard because the language in SB 60 stipulates that it would not go into effect until such guidelines have been established.

Mar 31, 2006 - 2:36 am Sean:

I started out as an Angelides supporter, mostly because he’s at least paid lip service to approaches to infrastructure building I consider worthy of discussion–namely “smart growth” and other new urbanist ideas. Bill’s right in that the treasurer ought to “own” this issue, given his background–why isn’t he front and center in the infrastucture debate?

Angelides’ inability to articulate (and sell) a coherent and thoughtful position on infrastucture when pressed is making me have second thoughts about supporting him in the primary. After all, policy is supposed to be his strong suit and if he can’t (or won’t) even talk about issues successfully, Dowd and Co. will make mince meat of him come September.

Mar 31, 2006 - 6:19 am Bill Bradley:

Yes, yes, group hug.

Everyone ready to sing?

Where are those &%^%%$#@ marshmallows, anyway?

Mar 31, 2006 - 6:28 am V. Bierko:

What a great conversation! I think several people identified the same perceived problem of not enough policy. That’s not to say primary voters are wonks, they just want to be able to say “he articulated a clear vision for the state.”

But here’s a question, how much policy is too much policy?

Malcolm Gladwell, author of “The Tipping Point” and “Blink” would argue we make a decision immediately, then try to rationalize it later. And, according to Gladwell, our decisions are often opposite to what we say we want.

Apply this California voters. What in the hell do they want?

The point I’m trying to get across here is either candidate only needs to have enough policy to make an impression. Or, to borrow a line from Machevelli “the appearance of policy is policy.”

So, which candidate has made the better imppression? Steve, Phil or Arnold?

Mar 31, 2006 - 7:45 am Julia Rosen:

Arnold simply because more poeple know about him. That advantage should degrade over time.

Voters are not going to argue over the minutia of policy like we are right now. Just look at the PPIC numbers on infrastructure it is clear they did not know what really went down. Whomever makes the loudest clearist noise without twisting themselves in knots will do well.

Mar 31, 2006 - 8:34 am Bill Bradley:

I think Julia is basically right on Comrade Bierko’s last question.

Mar 31, 2006 - 9:05 am Adam:

You know, I didn’t vote for Arnold in the recall, and I think he’s basically betrayed the rationale for his original candidacy, and over the past year+ has proven to be amazingly ineffective, and yet I have not ruled out voting for him in November. He’s hard to dislike, and there’s always the possibility that if he regains enough popularity, he might be able to push through the necessary political and budgetary reforms that the state needs.

First up, I’ll decide on the Dem I’ll vote for, but I may not vote for that person in November if I’m not impressed with his ideas.

Mar 31, 2006 - 9:39 am Sean:

I figured that one way in which Angelides would try to be the “anti-Arnold” was to present himself as a policy wonk (which is how I think of him) with some good ideas for the state. I remember reading a piece–I think it might have been by Harold Meyerson–in which he suggested the voters of CA might be ready for a policy-oriented, egghead type like Angelides.

To offer himself up as such seems like it ought to be part of his strategy. After all, he can’t expect to go toe to toe with Arnold in the charisma department, since the guv has a wee bit of charm and Angelides offers all the excitement of a bowl of oatmeal. I’m not convinced that by simply calling yourself the “anti-other guy” candidate you’ll engender a lot of enthusiasm for your candidacy. Ask Democrats at the national level how that went a couple of years ago.

Perhaps Bob Mullholland simply isn’t capable of running a constructive campaign.

Mar 31, 2006 - 10:10 am V. Beirko:

Sean makes a good point. If Angelides is the Anti-Arnold, who is the Pro-Phil?

Mar 31, 2006 - 10:27 am Bill Bradley:

The problem for Phil may be that he will need to become the anti-Steve in the not terribly distant future without having really become the pro-Phil first.

Mar 31, 2006 - 12:13 pm Bill Bradley:

Note: “Eli’s” post that I am responding to get caught up in the system’s anti-spam software because of the multiple URLs …

Well, it’s fortunate you had a good way of looking up those instances of Phil putting out something on infrastructure. I’m sure you don’t think I take notice of everything Westly’s offices send out.

During the actual debate over Arnold’s infrastructure plan and the Legislature’s various iterations of it, Phil was absent. On the day after the big bonds plan collapsed, at his only public event of the day, Phil said nothing about.

Only after he was questioned by the press did he offer up a fairly general criticism of what had transpired, turning it in the course of a few seconds into the usual attack on Schwarzenegger.

>Eli Jacks Says:
March 30th, 2006 at 6:31 pm e
As for the infrastructure bonds, Bill, try a Google search for “Angelides Infrastructure” and see what turns up. I found a few things:

“California State Treasurer Phil Angelides, Assemblymember Dave Jones
(D-Sacramento), Sacramento County Supervisor Roger Dickinson, and environmental leaders today called on Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger and members of the California Legislature to derail the State’s path toward sprawl, air pollution and traffic congestion by adopting a “green” infrastructure bond plan that supports smart growth, preserves California’s environment, and strengthens California’s economy for generations to come.”
http://www.treasurer.ca.gov/news/releases/2006/20060223_green.pdf

“The State Treasurer’s Office has conducted an initial review of Governor Schwarzenegger’s infrastructure proposal and found that it does not live up to its own stated commitments, contains misstatements of financial and other information, and leaves many significant questions unanswered.”
http://www.treasurer.ca.gov/news/releases/2006/20060109_infrastructure.pdf

(I’ll admit I’ve got no html skills)

Apr 1, 2006 - 12:28 pm credit scores:

credit scores…

Helen Bendix magnet ashore swallowing Starr pandemic!racetrack terminated:free credit http://www.credit-report-support.com/ …

May 23, 2006 - 6:34 pm

Write a Comment

Name:	(required, displayed)
Email:	(required, not publicized)
URL:	(optional, displayed) remember personal info?
Comments: