It is really kind of funny that every time Governor Schwarzenegger proposes anything that does not emanate from the agenda of the radical left, Democrat flak Steven Maviglio accuses the Governor of trying to play to the “right wing.”I refer you to two of his recent rants on the Democrats blog.
The first rant, railing against the idea of making those who receive taxpayer funds through government transfer programs (i.e. welfare) actually play by the rules, makes perfect sense to me; when Democrats promote socialism they mean it… and there darn well better be no rules that might make it difficult. Ok, I’m being a little silly here but two things are true: first, the Governor said he would remove people from the program if they are not following the rules of the program (e.g. participating in job training programs); and second, the Democrats always oppose anything that might result in reducing the welfare state and in doing so they accuse Republicans of trying to starve children or the elderly. So, the first rant made sense – after all, it is from the standard Democrat playbook (you remember, when all else fails accuse them of being “mean spirited.”)
The second rant is the one I don’t fully understand. Since when did the idea of building dams become a “right wing” concept? I’m fairly certain that there was a time when Democrats believed in building infrastructure – even dams. For example; Shasta Dam was built between 1938 and 1945 under President Franklin D. Roosevelt (D) and Gov. Frank Merriam (R); Friant Dam 1939-42, President Franklin D. Roosevelt (D), Gov. Culbert Olson (D), Folsom Dam 1948-56, President Harry Truman (D), Gov. Earl Warren (R), Bradbury 1950-53, President Harry Truman (D), Gov. Earl Warren (R); and the New Melones Dam built 1966-79, President Lyndon Johnson (D), Gov. Pat Brown (D) and Gov. Ronald Reagan (R). It all seems pretty bipartisan to me.
But in 2007 building dams is evidently a “right wing” agenda item. Why, one might wonder, is building dams no longer a bipartisan agenda? The answer is actually simple; because the radical environmentalists are a major special interest in control of the leftwing Democrat party. Why do radial environmentalists hate dams? Well, that is a discussion for another day. Suffice it to say – radical environmentalists hate dams, legislative Democrats hate dams.
Make no mistake, when Steven Maviglio talks about bipartisanship he does not mean an agenda that draws support from both parties; he means an agenda that is put forth by leftwing Democrats and embraced by Governor Schwarzenegger. Mr. Maviglio’s rants about Governor Schwarzenegger “veering” right (in the midst of the Governor’s proposal to raise taxes and socialize healthcare) is a bit laughable.
Indulge a little digression and “funning” for a moment…
Perhaps Republicans should accuse Democrats of being “mean spirited” for opposing the construction of dams for several reasons: (1) Democrats are just being mean to retirees who like to fish – fewer dams means fewer reservoirs; (2) Democrats are damaging the environment – all those folks in the city who like water recreation (e.g. water skiing) have to drive excessive miles to reach the current reservoirs – more fossil fuels burned hurts the environment; (3) by preventing the expansion of environmentally friendly hydroelectric power Democrats are driving up the cost of electricity thereby hurting the neediest in California – pretty soon children of single mothers will be homeless and shoeless; and, (4) ultimately, by denying the development of additional water storage, Democrats are trying to dehydrate older people and young children which is a serious health risk – pretty soon dehydrated people will start dropping like flies in Walmart stores all over California.
O.K., I admit, this list is a little over the edge, but I’m just trying to keep the discourse on public policy in the same spirit as promoted by the leftwing Democrats.
No comments:
Post a Comment