Chris,
Before you praise California too much, it helps to remember that the state has huge natural advantages that most states lack and it benefits from massive specific government subsidies {water being the biggest} that do not get reflected in the 'costs' of life in the Golden state.
For example, let's tax California for all the water that goes to the overpopulated region of Southern California. And let's also consider all the defense spending that has gone into the state since just before WWII. And California has most of the port space on the Pacific coast, something that its businesses and unions didn't create.
To be sure, California has done some excellent things in the area of public policy. Their state system of higher education was one although it is in serious economic trouble, in no small part due to public service unions. But it is also blessed by nature and government largess {all those electoral votes come at a price}.
While you're correct about the persecution of Mormons, I think calling them the "epitome of what successful citizens are all about" is stretching it.
I used to be Mormon, and grew up in Utah. There are some fine Mormons. There are some POS Mormons. They're just people; their religion is pretty much beside the point.
Was Dean wearing rose colored glasses when he spoke?
Gosh I hate IE 10! Could Microsoft just once leave bad enough alone?
xray/Zoombah wrote: "The big question is, would he treat white predators the same as black predators?"
Er...Nope. That's why his group is called "White Student Union" and not "Towson State U. Neighborhood Watch."
xray/Zoombah, etc. wrote: "The big question is, would he treat white predators the same as black predators?"
Er, um....NOPE! That's why his little vigilante group is called the "White Student Union" and not "Towson State U. Neighborhood Watch".
Jim, I do think that the "less government" crowd generally does not think about the concept a whole lot. It's why Free Republic, Breitbart, Drudge, and the Daily Caller are so popular. They confirm their readers biases and keep them coming back for more.
Anyways, would you rather live in Sweden, with their huge safety net and high taxes, or Somalia, with virtually NO government? Somalia should sound great. Some of Pith's most notorious gadfly's, who breathlessly peck away on their keyboards anytime someone says something mean about guns, could probably go over there and make great pirates.
The fact that he's trying to prevent criminal activity is a plus. The big question is, would he treat white predators the same as black predators? I'm betting he would if they were a problem and he could find them.
Not sure this writer knows anymore about business other than the spelling. Of course, that the case with most Journalist even some of those within the Financial Journals. These constant attacks on the Gov. over this current investigation is totally bogus, and it's an amazing waste of time and ink with so many other more relevant situations that needs coverage.
@davidlongfellow: You must be Islamaphobic. Otherwise you would ignore those sort of things.
@Kosh III: If you had ever read the Book of Mormon you'd have a better idea of what you're talking about. Whatever, historically Mormons are the most persecuted religion in America even though its members as a whole are the epitome of what successful citizens are all about. (No, I'm not a Mormon.)
Neither Christians nor people of other faiths should give a rat's ass about whether or not they make the newspaper. Somehow I don't imagine there are a lot of local Buddhists who are saying, "Why don't they write about us in the paper? It just makes me so ANGRY!"
Chris Allen: Are you saying that what is in effect "less government" really does not work and can actually cause the state to malfunction? WOW, what a concept. Bet that makes xray/zoombah/gastthesilent/vladtheineffectuallibertarianmonkey's butt bleed!
The article was amazing.
I am curious about his claim that the govnerment is committing genocide on white people, though.
Dorothy Morrison, an Important Spiritual Figure, has a cash flow potion for sale on her website for $10.95. Bury it outside and you'll be amazed at the results! You can't make this stuff up.
"Dozens" is exaggerating by quite a bit (here's the search results: http://www.google.com/search?as_q=Bob+Smie…)
However, Betsy was criticizing the entire Faith and Values page, not just one columnist.
California is a fantastic example of why too much direct democracy is a bad thing.
How about reposting Ferrier's breathless tweets? I think if anything reeks of Sweeps Month sensationalism, it's that.
Although, to be fair, Ferrier always reeks of Sweeps Month sensationalism, whether it's actually Sweeps Month or not.
By the way, Xray, California's direct democracy system IS the primary reason they are having problems. You can deny that all you want, but if you need to pass a 2/3 majority in the legislature, have the governor sign off on it, and get the citizens to approve it, it is practically destined for failure.
http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/…
Or as another commenter put it: "To begin with, the state's government and political system are designed to malfunction. A series of ill-conceived constraints and incentives have created weak and unaccountable public officials, even as they have set California on a course to fiscal disaster. In the state legislature, for example, a two-thirds majority is required to pass a budget. The original law creating this requirement was passed in the 1930s, and invoked the two-thirds rule only for budgets that grew by 5% or more over the prior year. But that qualification was dropped in the 1960s, and the two-thirds majority is now an annual necessity. Because California's political districts are thoroughly uncompetitive (in 2004, 153 state or federal legislative seats were up for election, and none changed parties), members of the legislature tend to come from the parties' ideological poles. And since this static landscape also leaves each party short of a two-thirds majority, budget negotiations inevitably devolve into a Mexican standoff."
Look, we can all find various lists of various topics of different states and post endlessly about them. If your idea of "quality of life" is just low taxes, than yes, you should be living in only red states. There are other factors though and I've met many people in blue states, and socialized European countries like Sweden for that matter, who love where they live. I was traveling in South America several years ago and talked with a guy from Sweden who has been to the U.S. many times who would never trade his country for ours. I worked with a guy from Seattle who couldn't stand Tennessee and moved back several months ago. I know several Californians who are dying to go back to that state. Everyone has a point of view and to each his own. Blue states have higher taxes. Red states are less educated and less healthy. Blue states may have more debt (although that's debateable). Red states tend to have less access to healthcare, more crime and more environmental problems. Blue states have more governmental services- and they pay for it more. Red states take more back from the federal government than they pay in, than do blue states. Most blue states have vast portions of them that are actually red. Most red states have major pockets of blue (like Nashville). I live in Nashville because it is a blue island in a sea of red. Many people wouldn't be caught dead living here, would rather live in the more homogeneous suburban counties. I could go on and on. It's all about perception and what you value. We should stop beating people up about things like this. But, at the very least, we should be willing to see both sides of the coin and stop letting our prejudices and confirmation biases dictate how we interact with others.
Re: “Hey, Gov. Haslam — CEOs are Accountable to Shareholders, Right?”
Mark,
I wasn't really praising California as much as I was just defending them a bit and commenting on the reflexive habit of certain individuals to just dump on the state while seemingly having no knowledge of the complexities that are involved. It's easy to just look at the negative and ignore the positive, be it states, countries, or political leaders, while doing the exact opposite for those things we like and value. Other states have huge natural resources also (like Texas with oil), but the major difference is that Texas isn't hamstrung by a referendum system that makes it near impossible to inact needed changes. And even with that, Texas isn't quite the well-run paradise that some claim.