Christian Science Monitor On Prop 23

US environmentalists, assessing the Republican tsunami that washed over the country, chose Wednesday to tout a key Election Day victory in beating back California’s Proposition 23, a ballot initiative that would have reversed clean-energy requirements statewide – and led quite possibly to similar initiatives in other states

Other states wouldn’t need a prop 23, because they wouldn’t be stupid enough to pass an AB 32 which needed to be overturned.

It was a sign, they said, that voters were not rejecting clean energy or the environment, but were responding to concerns about jobs and housing.

So taxing employers will increase the number of jobs. I get it.

“In the one race where the words ‘global warming’ were literally on the ballot, voters overwhelmingly voted for clean energy, and did so in a state with the country’s third highest unemployment rate,” said Gene Karpinski, president of the League of Conservation Voters.

That is what too much weed does to you.

About stevengoddard

Just having fun
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

9 Responses to Christian Science Monitor On Prop 23

  1. Myron Mesecke says:

    No. We rejected unproven theories, expensive energy, programs and projects that are only economically viable because they are heavily government subsidized.

  2. James Sexton says:

    I’m glad Cali didn’t belay AB32. In this instance, Cali can be a shining example of lunacy run amok. An uncontroversial exhibit A.

    • John Endicott says:

      James Sexton says:
      I’m glad Cali didn’t belay AB32. In this instance, Cali can be a shining example of lunacy run amok. An uncontroversial exhibit A.

      Indeed. I’m tempted to feel sorry for the people of Cali for the misery they will suffer as a result. But then I remember they voted for the likes of Jerry Brown, Barbara Boxer, and Nancy Pelosi and my sympathies evaporate a bit – they’re getting exactly what they voted for. I still feel sorry for the sane minority that voted against all of the above, unfortunately for them, the lunitics are firmly in control over there.

      • James Sexton says:

        True, I, too, feel a bit of sympathy for the minority there, but for the most part, as always happens, we reap what we sow.

  3. Layne Blanchard says:

    It really only proves you can spend 50 million on the typical spin and mislead the public.

    People can only vote what they understand. Control the message; control the people.

  4. Geezer1 says:

    If the surrounding states play their cards right this will be a great opportunity to recruit the productive people and businesses to leave Cali to strengthen other state economies. Let them suffer the consequences of their actions. It is obvious that a bankrupt state due to its political decisions has not really set in yet. When the pain is great enough most people change. They didn’t and thus the pain is not hard enough yet.

  5. Mike Davis says:

    You need to travel a few states away to find some logic in the actions of the majority.
    I left Nevada after growing up there and the nearest I could find was the South East. Red Neck Country!

  6. pyromancer76 says:

    “That is what too much weed does to you”. Hilarious and too true.

  7. stevecrouch says:

    I reckon a significant section of the froot loop state somehow mixed up the propositions and junked (slip of the tongue and entirely coincidental) dope instead of a really dopey concept

    And this from the same significant mob who assured the rest of us the stuff (dope) was harmless

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s