Percent Decline wrote on Nov 5, 2008 12:44 AM:At 9:30 p.m. Yes on 8 was 54.3%.
At 12:40 a.m. Yes on 8 was 52.4% with 63 percent of the precincts reporting.
When Prop 22 was passed in 2000, 61% of the voters voted for it.
At this rate of decline, in 2012 an amendment to rescind Prop 8 should pass quite nicely unless a decision on a court case to either the California or United States Supreme Court beats the amendment to the punch.

Ace wrote on Nov 5, 2008 2:13 AM:We havent had one quarter of negative GDP yet Ira Landis claims our economy is shrinking.

Where is the evidence?

The economy grew at a rate of 3.3% last quarter so thats factually innaccurate. Now that the Democrats failed to gain a super majority, I am going to take a wait and see approach on whether I move my plant to Mexico. However, should I stay, the union screwed my workers once again by pushing a "strong" President that would be sympathetic to union causes. In 2006, I negotiated a term in collective bargaining that factored in COLA adjustments in wages. That is a non binding condition that was agreed to be settled later as needed. I am not bound by that term and raises must be negotiated. However, my companies latest COLA survey showed we were paying only 5% above what California considers to be the poverty line at $40,000.00. I had approved $3.00 raises for everyone that would be paid for out of profits as to prevent any union complaints in the future. However, now I may not be able to afford the increases since Obama wants 50% of my income over 250K.

Yeah, right.

Instead, the workers will now get their $1000.00 tax cut Obama promised but wont get the $3.00 per hour raises. Thats a bad financial trade off as the raise would have netted them a $6,000.00 annual pay increase.

By electing Obama, they essentially traded a substantial raise for a $1000,00 tax cut. However, now the margin isnt there to pay the raises should Obama get his way.

No wonder Im wealthy and they are not.

The union screwed its memebers once again as Obama will soak up the moeny used to pay raises.

Bad financial decisions like this are why most people are struggling.

Voted Yes on Eight wrote on Nov 5, 2008 2:35 AM:Several of you yesterday eagerly called me a bigot for expressing my reasoned support for proposition 8.

A 'bigot' per my dictionary: "One who is strongly partial to one's own group, religion, race, or politics, and is intolerant of those who differ".

Think about it! That name-calling makes you a bigot whether I am or not.

Anyway you do not know me. For all you actually know I might be a black homosexual man who simply does not believe gays should marry. Or for all you know I may volunteer hours every week helping recovering former homosexuals who are now going straight.
Or for all you know maybe I recently rescued a young gay man who was being bullied by some teens and then I went to the rest room in the park and got forcibly raped by two other gays. Or maybe it was none of the above.

Anyway you called me a 'bigot' for being in favor of Proposition 8 and that makes you a 'bigot' for being strongly partial to your own vote 'no on 8 group' and intolerant to one who differed. Think about that for a while!!!

jvc wrote on Nov 5, 2008 3:37 AM:We ALL won including John McCain!

jvc wrote on Nov 5, 2008 3:40 AM:John McCain did not lose!
Ronald Reagan lost!

jvc wrote on Nov 5, 2008 3:59 AM:With health care now costing $2.4 trillion, even with a Democratic
legislature and executive, we will never
provide universal health care because
health care is just too profitable!
It is ALL about money that prevents us
from having preventative health care!

sdraoul wrote on Nov 5, 2008 4:08 AM:Obama wins. Murtha wins. Republicans lose in New England.

I've been through the Great Liberal Sweep of 1958, Golkdwater, Watergate and now this trifecta.

Whether or not Obama succeeds quickly, his honeymoon will end sooner than later and we'll see what he does for now words won't work, only deeds will.

The economic tsunami was too much for McCain to handle. Without that collapse, McCain would have won. But it did happen.

If I lived through Jimmy Carter and the 1993 Bill Clinton and the Blue dress, I'll live through Obama.

Democrats didn't do as well as they should have thanks to Harry Reid and Nancy pelosi. Can Obama keep them on the reservation? Can Obama get out of Iraq? Will Obama bring a magic wand to the office that will cure all our ills?

We'll see.

Looks like Ed Gallor has been retired in Escondido by Olga Diaz. Good.

jvc wrote on Nov 5, 2008 4:52 AM:Yes, race has driven this election
but how can you blame it when we have
been voting race since Reagan? It took
a mixed race candidate to bring this to the fore and see the subtlety
that existed beforehand!

OBAMA is PREZ wrote on Nov 5, 2008 5:23 AM:From the blogger formerly known as "OBAMACAN" -
It is no longer Obama "can" - not what he CAN do, but what he DID do and what he HAS DONE and what he WILL do.
All the malicious, negative racist losers who want to rant and rave and whine and cry, well boo hoo!
We tried it their way and they have RUINED THIS GREAT COUNTRY!
I don't want anyone to tell us how this great country is "going to hell" - They party has driven us there.
They missed the warnings about 9/11.
They responded to 9/11 by invding the WRONG COUNTRY.
They let Osama bin Laden get away.
They destroyed our emergency services and let Katrina destroy a city.
They have allowed their economic failed policies to drive us into bankruptcy.

Their vicious hatred has failed and has been defeated.
They have no right to complain or try to bring darkness, despair and hopelessnes.
HOPE HAS PREVAILED OVER FEAR AND DARKNESS.
OBAMA is PREZ!

Out of Africa wrote on Nov 5, 2008 5:49 AM:I watched the keynote address by Barack Obama to the 2004 Democratic National Convetion. He was then a little-known state legislature serving in the same Illinois statehouse that produced Abraham Lincoln.
Before that speech, I had never heard of him.
Before that speech, as we were in the midst of a failed war in Iraq to depose someone named Hussein, if you had told me that someone named BARACK HUSSEIN OBAMA, an African-American with a foreign-sounding name, whose father was born in Africa and had died there too, who was almost completely unknown in this country, would rise from the ashes of a 2004 loss to come back and first defeat the vaunted Clinton machine for the Democratic nomination then go on to defeat a moderate "maverick" war hero (in a time of war) with a previous record of bipartisan cooperation to become the nation's first African American president, I would never have believed it.
After that speech, I would have still found it a stretch to believe it could happen in the very next election cycle, but having seen the man I would have HOPE for maybe sometime in a more distant future.
The scope of this achievement simply defies imagination!

Here is a man who rose from NOTHING, from truly humble origins, no wealth or elite legacy or famous name to fall back on, who wholly self-made has achieved the highest position in the world.

Today BARACK HUSSEIN OBAMA has made true what used to be a myth mothers told their children:
In this country, if you work hard enough, anyone can grow up to become PRESIDENT.

She Said wrote on Nov 5, 2008 6:08 AM:So... now what happens with the same sex marriages that have already taken place? Does the discriminatory proposition address that?

Chuck wrote on Nov 5, 2008 6:13 AM:The peeps have spoken. Hussein is the man. But, you gotta love the lady who was on PBS this morning. "Thank God, I no longer need to pay for my mortgage or pay for the gas to fill up my car. I helped him, he's gonna help me"
LOL, in 3 months she'll be homeless and in 2 days her car wont run anymore. That is might effective campaigning. (to morons)

Chuck wrote on Nov 5, 2008 6:37 AM:I see the City of San Diego has banned drinking on the beaches over one big gang incident. LOL. It shows you how shallow voters are. Instead of moving cops to the beach area who are now sitting at the bottom of hills ticketing the old ladies for speeding as they drive to Vons, the city risks millions of dollars in tourist money. Do you think the college kids are going to pilgrimige to San Diego and fill the hotels for Spring Break, or come here for summer vacation?? LOL. But one thing is for sure, the lying cheats at the visitors bureau will keep it very quiet and not put the ban in any of their promotional materials, in order to sucker people to come here. I for one, will find every college and travel website I can find and make sure people know what the panty waist liberals are doing to San Diego and that drinking a beer on the beach will cost them $200. And, I'd also bet my house that 80% of the morons who voted for the ban, havent been to the beach in 2 years.

DD Wiz wrote on Nov 5, 2008 6:38 AM:The Investor Class
The published letter from Grant Kuhns exemplifies an utter ignorance of how investment works, when he expresses fear of, "Barack Obama's promise to increase taxes on the investor class."
Kuhns is merely regurgitating the mantra of "trickle down" -- that if you give the richest people even more, then they'll use it to invest -- which has been repeatedly discredited and disproven and, every time it has been tried, has led this country to economic devastation from which LIBERALS had to rescue us.
I don't know how many times I am going to have to repeat this:
Investment does not occur because some mythological "investor class" has more money in its pockets.
People who are "rich" do not create jobs or investments out of the goodness of their heart. Employment is not a welfare project or charitable offering. Those with means do need to invest their money, but they look for a solid business opportunity where they can respond to DEMAND from consumers. If there is no such opportunity, they will invest in precious metals, cash, fine arts or other appreciable goods, or they'll stick their cash in a mattress before they'll put it into a job-creating venture for which there is no demand.
Rich people do not invest because the government gives an incentive. They invest because there is an opportunity to make more money than leaving it in the bank. If someone sees a great opportunity to make a lot of money, or at least more than the bank pays, they will not leave their money in the bank. In fact, if the opportunity is good enough, they won't even need to HAVE any money in the bank, they will borrow ("capitalize") it -- they will borrow if they have to, but they will not let that opportunity get away.
The only way to stimulate the economy is to stimulate the economic engine that actually fuels investment: DEMAND by consumers. If working people and consumers have money in their pockets they will buy stuff. Then those who produce it will invest to SUPPLY it, and the economy is stimulated.
The failed, discredited "SUPPLY-side" theory shows that Adam Smith was right. It is not just about SUPPLY.
It is about SUPPLY AND DEMAND -- BOTH working together.

Special congratulations to our nation's 44th President: Barack Obama
Peace, prosperity and sunshine to all, DD Wiz

Ron wrote on Nov 5, 2008 6:39 AM:The Doodoo economics began in 1933, and has continued to dominate our government systems over time, growing larger, and stronger.
As Founder Benjamin Franklin is reported to have said, "when the people find they can vote themselves money, that will herald the end of the republic."

In 1787, Alexander Tyler is reported to have said: "A democracy is always temporary in nature; it simply cannot exist as a permanent form of government. A democracy will continue to exist up until the time that voters discover that they can vote themselves generous gifts from the public treasury. From that moment on, the majority always votes for the candidates who promise the most benefits from the public treasury, with the result that every democracy will finally collapse due to loose fiscal policy, (which is) always followed by a dictatorship."
Roosevelt enthroned interest-group politics and it will be the demise our our nation. NObama last night perfected that thinking. Pledging one group that he would steal, and redistribute.

This is why the wide sweep of history, and the facts surrounding that history are important in understanding why we are, where we are.
FDR set the economic box we find ourselves in today. All Congress's and President's that followed had to govern from within that "Box." From that point forward, it was the beginning, of the end of our Constitution, it's enumerated powers, and limited scope.
The Founders did that for a reason, which has been utterly lost today.
As Thomas Jefferson would say: "I would rather be exposed to the inconveniencies attending too much liberty than to those attending too small a degree of it."
Jefferson & the Founders fundamentally understood too large a government, too involved into the lives of the citizenry, would lead to tyranny.
It is often said, that when tyranny comes to America it will be wrapped in a flag carrying a cross.
Nope it will come in the drum beat of equality for all and political correctness.
It will come as a thief in the night stealing from those that have worked hard all their life's and "Spread the wealth around."
It will come in the form of silencing opponents because they must be racist if they don't agree with you.
Tyranny won't come in the form of a few trying to do what is right, it will come in the form of taking care of everyone at the expense of a few.

That is the pledge of Barackous NObamous.

Oh Boy wrote on Nov 5, 2008 6:43 AM:Well I see that the welfare lifers really do know how to vote. Now we can get on with our lives and wait for the handout. Does this election of a black American know mean that we can do away with affirmative action? I mean now the penical of reaching the white house has been made, there should be no other excuses for the man is keeping me down.

Karl wrote on Nov 5, 2008 6:54 AM:As a supporter of Ed Gallo and Sam Abed I was out for 2 hours last night and already 2 hours this morning picking up their signs. There are still alot of signs out there. Please, if you stuck them in the ground, pick them up. I am tired as hell looking at them and can't wait until the last one is gone.

Peace

Karl wrote on Nov 5, 2008 7:04 AM:Since I am retired but not eligible for Social Security or Medicare yet, can I now stand in line for some freebies by claiming that I'm unemployed? Where does the line start? How about that pesky mortgage? I've got 49 payments left, will the left get that paid for me too?

This is going to be good for me. I might be able to afford a new set of golf clubs and a new street legal golf cart next year. As soon as my mortgage is picked up by Uncle Sam and the unemployment checks start rolling in I'll also be able to install the new roof complete with solar. Yeehaa!

Ron wrote on Nov 5, 2008 7:10 AM:Now, where Grant Kuhns, and most other's go wrong on the history, is here. Once you make "The Government" a permanent part of the nation's economy, a competitor of resources, a distributor, and a regulator of those same resources, the game is over.
Instead of being an impartial judge, or an independent arbitrator, you end up having the picker of winners and losers.
Now, some are just fine with this set up, as long as they get what they want.
That mindset shows a very narrow avenue of critical thinking. And it is exactly the kind of thinking that came out of the elections of 1933, and has set the stage for all elections that would follow.
Today, this form of governmental advocacy seems normal. But, it is a far, far different thing that was thought of by our Founders, to take just one example, their belief in blind justice.
To keep things in perspective, let's first understand that FDR took 20% of the nation's GDP in taxes, from about 8% before his time. That is a huge leap.
And the government under the FDR model began to dispense, and dispurse monies to those they favored politically.
The model, while politically successful, is an economic disaster in the waiting. Comepletely unsustainable, but that was not FDR problem, his vision was to ensure poltical victories for a Democrat majority for decades to come. Economically, he set the Box, that will eventually sink us all.
Think about it....
Why would JFK reduce tax rates, if the FDR model of 94% was successful?
Because the bleeding of American jobs had already begun, reducing tax rates on the upper incomes was a means to slow the bleeding.
1980 & Ronald Reagan reducing the top tax rates alone was not enough, tax cuts across the board would.
Was it enough? NO....
Even though JFK reduced the rates, by 1970 steel jobs were leaving.
Now, why would you leave in a favorable tax environment? Because the opportunities for "maintaining profitability over time was better going offshore.
It was the same with Reagan, and even more drastic cuts were required to keep whatever business's alive here, alive.
It still wasn't enough.
And the sole reason it wasn't enough, is this. The Box created by FDR to secure political victories, would also subscribe us to economic doom.
You can not open the nation's piggy bank to individuals, business's.. big or small, or any other group, without making them competitors for the national treasure.
And once people can fundamentally understand that they.. can vote for themselves pay raises out of the nation's budget, we have secured our own demise.

Ms M wrote on Nov 5, 2008 7:13 AM:Oh Boy
[-] wrote on Nov 5, 2008 6:43 AM:...why don't you just wait and see!

Vista Granny wrote on Nov 5, 2008 7:15 AM:It sounds like Ron thinks we live in a Democracy!! Though maybe I didn't wade far enough through his writing this a.m. to be certain. However, I think he got the wrong economic theory to call doo doo economics. The person who wrote about doo doo was referring to Reagan's (not Kennedy's)trickle down theory. He was not talking about governments actualy caring about the little guy. But Ron may be correct in that the young, weary and downtrodden finally have spoken! BTW, did you see the statistics on WHO voted for WHOM? It seems the mostly highly educated people voted for Obama. No surprise there!

DD Wiz wrote on Nov 5, 2008 7:26 AM:The Investor Class
The published letter from Grant Kuhns exemplifies an utter ignorance of how investment works, when he expresses fear of, "Barack Obama's promise to increase taxes on the investor class."
Kuhns is merely regurgitating the mantra of "trickle down" -- that if you give the richest people even more, then they'll use it to invest -- which has been repeatedly discredited and disproven and, every time it has been tried, has led this country to economic devastation from which LIBERALS had to rescue us.
I don't know how many times I am going to have to repeat this:
Investment does not occur because some mythological "investor class" has more money in its pockets.
People who are "rich" do not create jobs or investments out of the goodness of their heart. Employment is not a welfare project or charitable offering. Those with means do need to invest their money, but they look for a solid business opportunity where they can respond to DEMAND from consumers. If there is no such opportunity, they will invest in precious metals, cash, fine arts or other appreciable goods, or they'll stick their cash in a mattress before they'll put it into a job-creating venture for which there is no demand.
Rich people do not invest because the government gives an incentive. They invest because there is an opportunity to make more money than leaving it in the bank. If someone sees a great opportunity to make a lot of money, or at least more than the bank pays, they will not leave their money in the bank. In fact, if the opportunity is good enough, they won't even need to HAVE any money in the bank, they will borrow ("capitalize") it -- they will borrow if they have to, but they will not let that opportunity get away.
The only way to stimulate the economy is to stimulate the economic engine that actually fuels investment: DEMAND by consumers. If working people and consumers have money in their pockets they will buy stuff. Then those who produce it will invest to SUPPLY it, and the economy is stimulated.
The failed, discredited "SUPPLY-side" theory shows that Adam Smith was right. It is not just about SUPPLY.
It is about SUPPLY AND DEMAND -- BOTH working together.

Special congratulations to our nation's 44th President: Barack Obama
Peace, prosperity and sunshine to all, DD Wiz

Post 6:38am and skipped
(while SIX later posts, including one later and longer post from "Ron," are cherry-picked for special favoritism)
Re-post 7:26am

Caro Cogitatus wrote on Nov 5, 2008 7:26 AM:Here I was, feeling all bipartisan after President Obama's gracious victory speech last night, when here comes Ron with his usual longwinded bile.

Listen carefully, folks. This is why Barack Obama is a better man than I:

Suck it, Ron. You lose.

We now return you to your regularly scheduled bipartisan happyfest.

Gotta Wonder wrote on Nov 5, 2008 7:26 AM:Chuck is reduced to blogging about booze!

Economics Lecture wrote on Nov 5, 2008 7:32 AM:The last thing we need is a lecture from Ron about DooDoo Economics from the losing party who showed us all what DooDoo and Trickle On can really do to an economy.
We tried it their way and boy are we sorry now.
The same ones who wrecked the car are whining about having to turn the keys over to a sober driver.

esteban wrote on Nov 5, 2008 7:35 AM:To all you bloggers on welfare...congrats. I will be issuing checks from my personal savings to you starting today. Get in line. I will be working more so you don't have to. I love this country.

esteban wrote on Nov 5, 2008 7:37 AM:Caro...Ron didn't lose. We ALL lost. You wait and see. Oh and say goodbye to these blogs. Cuz the Libs will do away with free speech in the comimg years. Oh well, it (free speech) was fun while it lasted!

BushGivethUhnuldTaketh wrote on Nov 5, 2008 7:45 AM:Don't spend your stimulus check right away. The liberals in Sacramento have just decided they deserve 50% of it, so they raised SDI taxes $300 per person.

Yes on Eight Wins wrote on Nov 5, 2008 7:47 AM:The Proposition Eight results did vary a lot by county, It lost big in the San Francisco Bay Area, but won Big in a number of other counties. The California Secretary of State Website lists the election results by county for state and Federal offices and issues. So far at 7:20 AM today it looks like yes on prop 8 is far enough ahead to be certain to win as most of the more liberal counties are already counted. However the web site footnotes also seem to say that IF the voter tally people count even one ballot in a precinct it includes that precinct in the tally of precincts counted. So the numbers can keep changing.
The way I read the web site the status at about 7:15 AM this morning the status was:
Statewide is 52.1% YES
Riverside County is 76% Yes
San Bernardino County is 67.6% Yes.
San Diego County is 54% Yes
San Francisco County is 23.4% Yes.

Gotta Wonder wrote on Nov 5, 2008 7:47 AM:esteban[-] wrote on Nov 5, 2008 7:37 AM:
And so it begins from your ilk, whaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa!

jvc wrote on Nov 5, 2008 7:54 AM:Use your personal savings to bailout Wall Street millionaires!

Karo Syruptatis wrote on Nov 5, 2008 8:00 AM:The only good outcome after the elction last night is that Hussein will not be able to raise taxes and institute Marxism during this recession. Then, in 2 years, normal people will regain control of congress, and then nothing gets done for the final 2 years of his reign.
But, on Jan 20th we will all be treated to the chariot arriving in DC, being drawn by the symbol of the democratic party (jackasses) with staff waving and women swooning and fainting. I cant wait.

Karo Syruptatis wrote on Nov 5, 2008 8:02 AM:>>>San Francisco County is 23.4% Yes.>> What a shock!!!!!!!!!!

See ya wrote on Nov 5, 2008 8:07 AM:Ace [-] wrote on Nov 5, 2008 2:13 AM:

Please move to Mexico, the stronger middle class will fill your void.

I hear the Mexican drug lords will give you the special treatment you deserve.

They realy like wealthy American's down there.

Ms M wrote on Nov 5, 2008 8:09 AM:It bogles the mind to read the negative predictions from the folks who belong to a party that has nearly destroyed America. You cons should not be upset with the libs and Obama. You should direct your anger to your leaders. The ones that have lied to you for 7 plus years. The ones who lied to us to get us to war with a country that had nothing to do with 9/11. Think about Katrina, the lack of response and a city that still has not been rebuilt. The lies about wire tapping and tortue - to name a few. You should be upset with your party a party that Americans don't trust. A party that tried to win through fear and hate. A party that has shown it's racism - a party that is not inclusive of all Americans. A party that could not bring themselves to mention morality and conservatism - things that you ran on for years. A party where the encumbant president could not show his face at the rallies and whose endorsement was not solicited because it would only remind voters of why our country is on it's knees. A party who had a candidate that did not differ from Bush. A party that divides America.

Don't take your anger out on Obama and the libs - your party lost the election because you are no longer the party to run the greatest country in the world. And that is fact.

OMG wrote on Nov 5, 2008 8:10 AM:Bill -] wrote on Nov 4, 2008 10:33 PM:

"What is the incentive to risk capital when its taken at a rate that it will be if your boy gets his way."

Thank you for enlightening us Bill...on what a racist you are.

oh esteban wrote on Nov 5, 2008 8:10 AM:surely even you don't believe the claptrap you're trying to pass off on us this morning. if you do, it will be entertaining to keep tabs on you in the next few years, as all of your expectations are proven wrong. you might notice, however, that this is how McCain and Palin might have gotten the vote of people (maybe your vote too): convince them that a vote for Obama is the end of freedom of speech, the beginning of a welfare state, and all the other lies. The GOP knew it had nothing to offer but confabulated terror of the opponent. esteban, of course, bought it hook, line, and sinker. pay attention, esteban: in the coming years you will learn first hand how much you've been lied to.

tjefferson wrote on Nov 5, 2008 8:11 AM:To Ron. No serious historian believes Benjamin Franklin said "when people find they can vote themselves money, that will herald the end of the republic." Nobody who has seriously studied history and has read Franklin's words would believe he ever wrote anything so ungrammatical. Wikiquote says that this quote was never attributed to Franklin before 1988. It's bogus.
Alexander Tyler was a law professor at Edinburgh University when he made the predication in 1787 that "a democracy is always temporary." Who cares what a Scottish law professor predicted in 1787?
This is about the third time I've called you out on bogus right-wingnut quotes. Stop making a fool of yourself and learn history from solid sources. Hannity and right wing blogs aren't reliable. Haven't you learned that by now?

Zeus wrote on Nov 5, 2008 8:13 AM:Esteban (and other Fox robots): Do you ever stop to consider that perhaps inspired and hopeful people are more productive than humiliated and hopeless people. You've grown so accustomed to pathetic leadership over the past 8 years that you have forgotten that there is more to living in a country than just hating half of your country. Take your chronic negative attitude on a long walk down a short pier, it serves no one other than your selfish self.

Freedom wrote on Nov 5, 2008 8:17 AM:Everyone loves freedom. But what does freedom mean? For example, in a society in which everyone is on his own completely, is that person free? I don't think so. That's an idea that a person all alone in a wilderness is the freest person. Nothing could be further from the truth. That wilderness person has to be scared to death about self-protection and where the next meal is coming from. He is completely controlled by his fears and his needs. A sprained ankle might mean death. That's the idea some people have about how our society should work. Everyone on his/her own. Each against all. No interference other than competition. Folks, that's not freedom, that's a rat in a maze. Compare this to a society in which no one has to fear a health crisis, an absence of education, and enough to eat. In my opinion, that's a free person, free to pursue his/her dreams without being inhibited by the terror that a mistake could be fatal to himeself and his family. Some people think that without that terror, people would not be motivated to do anything. I guess that's true for some people, but not many. If you love freedom, you just have to love a society where there is a basic set of safety nets.

To Those Who Supported McCain wrote on Nov 5, 2008 8:19 AM:The rest of us have lived through eight years of hell and are still standing. We expect you all to man up and take what comes, as we did.

A note of caution: you won't enjoy the I Told You So Club as much as you think you will.

Predictions wrote on Nov 5, 2008 8:22 AM:Predictions from SDRaoul at 4:08 a.m. and other doom and gloom naysayers are utterly without socially redeeming value.
Why would anyone listen to people who got their productions wrong time after time after time?
Why would anyone listen to those who were wrong on war, wrong on the economy and wrong on every single thing they have ever said?

And for Ron's nasty little rant at 6:39 a.m., he loves to make fun of people's names and he thinks he is oh so clever when he is just plain obnoxious. Hey Ron: you're trying to think of what to call Obama?
Start practicing this one: MISTER PRESIDENT.

For the first time in eight years we will have a legitimate president who actually assumes the office by being elected to it.

Pink Power Ranger wrote on Nov 5, 2008 8:24 AM:It's a beautiful * O * day in the neighborhood.

Wrapped in my fuzzy plush pink robe & slippers...sipping peach tea with a fresh bagel...
listening to Buffalo Springfield...something happening here...
enjoying the news of the day...
NCTimes today section A page 5
ahhh....
Gallo waving GOODBYE....::smirk::

how sweet of NCTimes ....when I heard he was on the corner alone waving his sign I said....
"Oh I'd love a picture of that!"

this is like christmas....Virginia ,there is a Santa Claus!!!!!!

Moral of this story....
Watch what you do on the Escondido City Council or you too could be outside in the rain like Ed waving your sign alone.

Pink ;p
*GAG* member

OBAMA COMES wrote on Nov 5, 2008 8:26 AM:And yes we did!

WELCOME PRESIDENT OBAMA!

stunning wrote on Nov 5, 2008 8:26 AM:Obama seems to have won the majority of the votes, including the third party candidates...is that true? Obama won NM, NV, Ohio, Florida, Virginia, Colorado, Pennsylvania. He won Pennsylvania 55-43, contrary to raoul's harpings about a closing gap. He won the Hispanic vote 2:1. Palin won the vote of, I believe, 3 former Hillary supporters, all relatives of Sarah. A trouncing. The next interesting question will be the fate and future of Ms Palin. I can imagine her falling back into oblivion. I can imagine her becoming a rising star in the GOP. What's your opinion, folks? Any bets?

Mira wrote on Nov 5, 2008 8:28 AM:Look, those of you who are not interested in standing up on two feet are welcome to remain monkeys.

The rest of us are moving on. Progressive thinking prevails, finally. Today I have great hope for the future, finally.

Blessed be the great country of the UNITED STATES OF AMERICA!

Welfare Queens wrote on Nov 5, 2008 8:33 AM:Oh Boy (6:43 a.m.), Karl (7:04 a.m.) and Esteban (7:35 a.m.)
No, you have it backwards!
We now look forward to the END of welfare.
No more corporate welfare queens oinking in no-bid defense contracts with cronies, or special tax discounts on unearned income paid for by WORKING PEOPLE or bailouts for billionaires who want to "share the wealth" of the workers who create it.

Now we will see hard work being rewarded and an end to corrupt corporate welfare.

Chuck wrote on Nov 5, 2008 8:37 AM:Why spend $1Billion plus on an election. It's clear all you need to do is promise everyne $3-$5K in cash from other people, promise them free healthcare and tell them they dont have to pay their mortgage and you're in. I could have done that with about $100,000. Damn, another opportunity lost

Oh Boy wrote on Nov 5, 2008 8:39 AM:All of these comments about finally getting rid of the Repbulicans makes one wonder, if this election of Obama was not of total race and Bush has been ruining the country for 8 years, where were all of you during 2004? Why were not all of the welfarians out in force then? This man promised to divide us further by doing away with capitalistilism. In a sense Esteban is correct. Obama will, in his words, spread the wealth. This country is no longer "don't ask what your country can do for you, ask what you can do for your country," (JFK). It has changed into, ask not what I can do for my country, ask where is my handout. As per the lady on PBS, "He, Obama will pay my mortagage, put gas in my car," etc.

Ron wrote on Nov 5, 2008 8:39 AM:Too all of my liberal friends...
Yes, Barackous NObamous has won.
You, have lost.
As of right now, you do not know that you have, or by how much.
That will become ever clearer to you over time.
But I will say this to you, and if you had any sense, you'd agree with me.
With the top 10% of the country paying 70% of your bill, this is not the time to start hating them.
I know that Barackous gave you permission last night, but smart folks don't bite the hand that feeds them.
And, it's NOT Barackous NObamous money to give you. He won't even part with a small share of his wealth,
Look at his Aunt, his Uncle, and his brother.
So, as smooth as Barackous was last night, about coming together...
You have learned to hate Rich people, and the sad part now is, he was the one that taught you, and gave you permission.
Now, I know about this time, you'll throw up in my face the name William Buffet. He's rich, he backs Nobama.
So, I'm in good company, you say to yourself. He's smart, so therefore I must be smart too?
Wrong..
He's smart, and you've been lead by your nose.
Ever notice, as I have...
that no matter who is President, who runs the Congress, Bill Buffet never gets poorer? Have you noticed that?
That's because he's really smart, and you just think you are.
Buffet is flexible, he know's the laws, he know's the tax codes, or at least, he can hire a bunch of smart people to help him keep one step ahead of the IRS.
But, he also knows people, people inside the government, people inside business. He's a networker.
He has lend his name, his brand to NObama... for what?
For a higher estate tax, so that he can come from behind and pick the bones of small business's that fell prey to the predatory tax structure?
Now, you don't have to agree with me, as many of you won't. But...
NObama's plan is to spread whatever wealth is remaining inside the United States. It's limited, because NObama like all liberals want to believe economic systems are closed. I simply take from one group, give to another, and bubble up happens.
Bubble up does not increase wealth, it simply transfers it, for a short time, until it again bubbles back up to the top again. This is the Liberal Model.
A re-circulating, if you will.
It's take money, time, dedication, and government off your back to create wealth, real wealth. To grow a business.
To retire comfortably.
The Liberal model is designed to do one thing, and one thing only... to spread misery.
If I'm hurting, then you should hurt too. THAT is the Liberal model.
In the meantime, trickle down is happening, outside the US. Those companies are growing, our's are shrinking. And if you look at the one's that just came out of Soviet style economies, they all hav either a flat tax, or very reduced tax rates.
This is the direction we need to go in.
But, we won't.
We still have too many people stuck on stupid about how economies grow.
And too many now believe, that your money should be my money.
So, in the end, when NObama's policies begin to fail, we "clingers" will be blamed. But that blame can only happen so long. It will get old, you will grow tired, when all the promises NObama made to you do not happen.
I know you can't here me now, your so filled with hope, and change of things you still do not understand.
This is why I kept restating my theory about "sliding scale socialists", which sadly now, includes many Republicans, or as I like to call them, Repubics.
We all know how this works. We work, we save, we do for ourselves.
THAT is the American way.
So, be happy, for tomorrow you'll still have to get up, go to work, and pay your bills. NObama won't fill your gas tanks, he won't put food on your table, and he won't help your kid get into college. That's.. YOUR JOB.
Always has been, always will be.
And when the "let-down" set's in,
just remember, Ron is here, a shoulder to cry on.

Chuck wrote on Nov 5, 2008 8:41 AM:>>>Progressive thinking prevails, finally. Today I have great hope for the USA>>>>

LOL, progressive thinking is liberal code speak for load me up with he freebees. You hoped for the freebees and now you will get them, congratulations

Raoul it was Gods will wrote on Nov 5, 2008 8:43 AM:Surely, you wouldn't refute the words of God's humble messenger, Sarah Palin, would you Raoul?...read'em and weep...

Palin: God will do the right thing on election day

“To me, it motivates us, makes us work that much harder,” she told the influential Christian leader, whose radio show reaches millions of listeners daily. “And it also strengthens my faith because I know at the end of the day putting this in God’s hands, the right thing for America will be done, at the end of the day on Nov. 4.”

Raoul, are you here to argue with God?

Karo Syruptatis wrote on Nov 5, 2008 8:45 AM:Boy, that didnt take long. Divorce lawyers are now advertising "low fees on same-sex annulments", and the clip-haireds from Planned Parenthood are all over the radio explaining how fathers (can you still say that in California?) will mistreat their children if they need parental notification for an abortion.

Ron wrote on Nov 5, 2008 8:46 AM:Exactly my point...
"tjefferson" @8:11 AM,

As with most progressives, liberals, or whatever else they are calling themselves today to hide who and what they really are....

You cede my point, by your own comments.

"No serious historian believes Benjamin Franklin said "when people find they can vote themselves money, that will herald the end of the republic."

Like all children, who think they know better than their parents, we commission our own demise.
Thank you for your contribution.

Or, as an old bank robber would say: "Time to step up, and get mine."

So while you lib's will fight over the remaining crumbs inside the US, other's are being trickled down on.
But, because you believe that you are owed these... you'll never understand it, until the piggy bank is empty.
Some people just have to learn the hard way.

Oh Boy wrote on Nov 5, 2008 8:47 AM:To Welfare Queens, very nice comeback with your 8:33 am comment. I bet you enjoy that welfare check bailout every month. I hope that Barney Franks is your financial advisor. Opps I am sorry; isn't he the one that said that Fannie and Freddie were not in trouble? We will find in every nook and cranny of things that the messiah does wrong and hold him accountable and with such disparage as the liberials have done with GWB.

In addition some good reading from the WSJ on line, by, Mr. Shapiro, an investigative reporter and lawyer who previously interned with John F. Kerry's legal team during the presidential election in 2004.
The Treatment of Bush Has Been a Disgrace What must our enemies be thinking?

Protected Marriage wrote on Nov 5, 2008 8:55 AM:Proposition 8 would have passed by a higher margin with its original title "PROTECT MARRIAGE". That is what the title was during signing and certification of the petition and the title that it was supposed to have on the ballot itself. Then Jerry Brown who is for gay marriage ordered the title to be changed to "Eliminates the Right of Same-sex couples to Marry" which made it a lot harder to get it passed.
The opponents used this to the maximum in ads, to shout from bullhorns, to get high school kids who did not even understand the issues to come out and hold up signs for them as if this "right" being taken away was a right they had held since the founding of the country instead of a so called right they more or less held for several months due to a flawed decision by just one judge.

Clarification... wrote on Nov 5, 2008 8:55 AM:For those of you who like to blame President Bush for the Katrina disaster, here is some clarification information so that you may adjust your incorrect attitudes:

However, "if you go back to August 27th," President Bush had already "declared a state of emergency in the state of Louisiana under Title V of the Stafford Act, ... Ergo, Katrina became an Incident of National Significance on August 27th -- two days before the storm.

"Even before the storm struck the Gulf Coast," Secretary of Homeland Security Michael Chertoff was the "federal official with the power to mobilize a massive federal response to Hurricane Katrina, [and] could have ordered federal agencies into action without any request from state or local officials."

So, if you want to blame anybody for the catastrophe then you can blame Michael Chertoff, not President Bush.

But then again, since there are those of you who dislike the President so much, you probably blame him for everything that doesn't go the way you want it to.

Focal Point wrote on Nov 5, 2008 8:56 AM:stunning[-] wrote on Nov 5, 2008 8:26 AM:
You all are missing the greatest question of all posed by the definitive Obama victory. What is going to happen to Saturday Night Live?

Joe the Voter wrote on Nov 5, 2008 8:58 AM:Ace at 2:13 a.m. brags: "I'm wealthy and they are not."
Are you as wealthy as WARREN BUFFET?
You know, the DEMOCRAT who supported PRESIDENT OBAMA?

Joe the Voter has spoken.
I'm Joe the Voter and I approve this message.

Dont Ya Know wrote on Nov 5, 2008 8:58 AM:She Said[-] wrote on Nov 5, 2008 6:08 AM:
This will be determined by the United States Supreme Court.

Focal Point wrote on Nov 5, 2008 8:59 AM:Goodbye Sarah: It was fun while it lasted.
Sarah will have to content herself with being Gov of Alaska and the CIC Alaskan National Guard.

Chuck wrote on Nov 5, 2008 9:04 AM:>>>Now we will see hard work being rewarded and an end to corrupt corporate welfare.>>>
The only problem with that is, 9am to 4pm(or 2pm for teachers) is not considered hard work, especially when you call a lawyer if you get shorted 15 minutes on the day you left at 4:15.
Hard work is when you do more that you get paid to do, with the attitude that you will eventually get paid more for what you do.
And I suggest, that concept is hateful to the very soul, to anyone who voted for Hussein.

Happy day for yahoos wrote on Nov 5, 2008 9:07 AM:When you think about how much some of the yahoos here have been bashing liberals for all the problems of the last 8 years, while the liberals had almost zero power, can you imagine the whining and finger-pointing we're in for now that we have a Democrat in the White House and majorities in both houses of Congress? It'll be unbearable. On the other hand, these folks have no practice in making accurate, true accusations, so maybe they'll be too confused to write.

Alf wrote on Nov 5, 2008 9:07 AM:Well, "She Said" at 6:08 AM,
That dilemma may make a fine case for some high level court.
However, I am heartened by the observation I make below.
In 2000, Proposition 22 passed by 61 percent of the voters.
In 2008, a virtually identical proposition, Prop. 8, is being passed by about 52 percent of the voters.
If this trend continues, in another 8 years something like an anti-Prop. 8, a repealing of Prop will win, hands down.
Patience is a virtue.
It will happen.
Regards, Alf.

Alf wrote on Nov 5, 2008 9:12 AM:Don't worry, "Protected Marriage" at 8:55AM, in a few years there will be a "Restore marriage rights to gays" Proposition to revoke Prop 8, that is if the court hasn't beat them to the punch.
All things in their time.
Rgards, Alf.

Hank wrote on Nov 5, 2008 9:25 AM:To sdraoul, chuck, ron, et al:

It is unfortunate that the media, even those supportive of President-elect Obama, refer to him as the first black president. He was elected not BECAUSE he is of African-American heritage, but IN SPITE OF that. That is what is so remarkable. He was elected because his qualifications far exceeded those of the competition and his stated goals resonated with Americans across the country.

He was elected because Pennsylvanians and Ohioans were largely unconvinced that Joe the Plumber was anything but a joke and were not seduced by the southern-fried morality of Sarah Palin (her being from Alaska is irrelevant; she acted and sounded like she came from a lower-48 “red state”). McCain-Palin was blown away in Pennsylvania, and then Ohio in spite of applying almost all their closing efforts to those two critical states.

It is a loser’s rant to disparagingly refer to president-elect Barack Hussein Obama as “Hussein” and endlessly blog “wait and see how he fails so I can say I told you so.” I know, I know, you have freedom of speech (to sound like an idiot). John McCain gave an excellent concession speech, and took pains to advise his followers to NOT disparage Barack Obama. Listen to Mr. McCain.

I would not expect it from you, but it would be refreshing to hear from those who were disappointed by the election results: "We waged a good fight and lost against a competent and honorable foe, now how can I help our new leaders to improve the present situation and return America to her greatness?" Just like John McCain so honorably said last night.

Are they married wrote on Nov 5, 2008 9:29 AM:'She Said' wrote on Nov 5, 2008 6:08 AM: So... now what happens with the same sex marriages that have already taken place? Does the discriminatory proposition address that?
--------------------------
The "California Marriage Protection Act"
is rather short. It says "Only marriage between a man and a woman is valid or recognized in California"

That is the total wording of the proposition,
(The full text of each proposition is written in the back of your official information guide.)

Parties will argue about the status of the gay couples who were "married" during the several month period. Attorneys filed papers with the supreme court asking them to place a stay on their May 2008 ruling until after the November 4th election to avoid confusion if Prop passed, but the judges refused to do so. (I think it was refused by the same 4-3 judges). Couples who exchanged vows to each other can still keep them of course, they could register to be domestic partners if they weren’t already.

Chuck wrote on Nov 5, 2008 9:32 AM:>>>So, if you want to blame anybody for the catastrophe then you can blame Michael Chertoff, not President Bush.>>
Blame whoever you want. There is no organization or bureacracy on the planet that could have handled that storm then, or even now. Washington declared that entire region a disaster area 36 hours in advance of landfall and warned people to get out. The ones who are screaming the loudest are the ones who stayed behind and survived.

esteban wrote on Nov 5, 2008 9:33 AM:Despite my ire for all thinigs liberal, I wish Obama well. As an American, I do not want to see him fail us...unlike you libs who will cut off your nose to spite your face. But when Obama screws up...will you libs be so quick to judge as you have Dubya? I bet not. Even though I hate libs, I do think dubya was one of the worst prez' ever. I'm not so blind to ideology like you libs are. Godspeed to us all!

to Oh Boy wrote on Nov 5, 2008 9:37 AM:Wow, do you, like esteban, really believe that Obama will do away with capitalism? You guys really bought all that GOP campaign nonsense, didn't you? "Spread the wealth", for example, was an out-of-context snippet used to dupe voters. That was obvious to the landslide that just voted Obama in, but I guess there are a few, like you, who actually thought it was some kind of truth. Amazing. (As many have pointed out, by the way, Ms Palin said very similar things about spreading the wealth in Alaska, and then actually did it! That was real. Obama's is a bumper sticker. See the difference?) And to claim it was all about race is really fascinating. The Black vote for the Democrat was hardly different than it has been in any of the previous elections, in the mid-90%s. You see, Republican policies have been very, very bad for Black people for a long time. It's the policies, not the color of the candidate, and they have consistently voted that way. Similarly, the GOP dream that all those Hillary supporters were just dumb broads who'd vote for any skirt was also trounced yesterday. It turns out that like African-Americans, women vote with intelligent self-interest, and Obama won the female vote handily. These examples show us how out of touch the GOP is from reality, how out there in a fantasy space of paranoia and hatred they live. The land of Bush, Rove, McCain, Palin, esteban, and Oh Boy. Did I hear any of them say they wanted to secede? Please?

OMG wrote on Nov 5, 2008 9:43 AM:stunning -] wrote on Nov 5, 2008 8:26 AM:

The male Republicans candidates in 2012 will see no need for gender correctness like they demanded from the Dems this year.

She will make a weak attempt to run for President in 4 years and be completely annihilated in the primaries.

Watching it will be like driving by a car wreck, morbid curiosity.

He Said wrote on Nov 5, 2008 9:44 AM:I wonder where my friend Alf is today. I hope he isn't in too much despair over the injustice forced upon a discriminated segment of our society. Cheer up, buddy, it probably really isn't over yet. I hope that "Don't You Know" at 8:58 AM is right about the United States Supreme Court.

Wanda wrote on Nov 5, 2008 9:56 AM:We all thank the 8:55 AM poster for the "Clarification..."

As it turns out, the Katrina fiasco was actually the fault of the incompetent cronies whom Bush had appointed, so it wasn't Bush's fault at all.

"Heckuva job crony"

Am I missing something here?

Apollo wrote on Nov 5, 2008 9:57 AM:Re: She Said (6:08 a.m.) and Are they married (9:29 a.m.)
While the Ex-Post Facto provision of the U.S. Constitution prohibits any retroactive application of law in CRIMINAL matters, it does not apply to civil legislation. So civil laws, including the laws of marriage CAN BE applied retroactively - IF AND ONLY IF such retroactive application is specifically stated in the legislation.
Proposition 8 included no specification of retroactive application and cannot be applied to any marriages legally performed (in California, Massachusetts or Connecticut) prior to its effective date.

Moreover, there is a compelling argument under the 14th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution's requirement of "equal protection under the law" that Prop 8 violates the Federal Constitution, so likely the State Supreme Court can put a stay on allowing it to take effect until it is litigated all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court, which could take years.
And the California Supeme Court must do this, because the argument in states that have allowed this right (California, Massachusetts and Connectiuct) is different than the other 47 states (plus territories).
It was in a California case (overruling a California Supreme Court decision) that the U.S. Supreme Court held in Reitman v. Mulkey (387 U.S. 369 (1967)) that, while a state is not required to specify legal rights, once it has granted them they cannot be withdrawn.
This was in the case of California's Prop 14 (November 1964) that repealed the Rumsford Fair Housing Act. The court held that California was not required to pass the Rumford Act, but having done so and thus conferring a right, that right could not be withdrawn.
That case remains established precedent only in the states that have already legalized same-sex marriage.

Other States on Marriage wrote on Nov 5, 2008 9:58 AM:Did any one think California is the first state to define marriage as the union of one man with one woman? It is more like the THIRTYITH STATE TO DO SO with an AMENDMENT to their state CONSTITUTION.
Florida and Arizona also passed amendments to their state constitutions yesterday, making them 28th and 29th. There are now about 40 STATES THAT DEFINE MARRIAGE IN THEIR STATE LAWS as a man and a woman. There is some overlap and non-overlap here, leaving five states in dispute.

tjefferson wrote on Nov 5, 2008 10:00 AM:Ron at 8:46. How typical of Ron. I caught him in another falsehood and he lectures me by building a straw man and knocking it down. I didn't "cede any point" to Ron. Ron was caught fibbing again and he won't own up to it gracefully as an adult would. The rest of Ron's post is utter nonsense, and I might add, as ungrammatical as Ron's Franklin quote.

to OMG wrote on Nov 5, 2008 10:04 AM:I suspect you are right. Paul Krugman predicts that Palin will become a force in the GOP, i.e., that her base will increasingly BE the GOP. Which would be the end of the GOP, as we've seen. It'll be fun to watch all this evolve. What won't be fun is the non-stop yammering that Obama is a socialist that we are in for for the next 8 years.

Wanda wrote on Nov 5, 2008 10:05 AM:Well, stunning, at 8:26 AM, if there is a god, Caribou Barbie will go the way of Dan Quayle.

Forgotten but not gone.

tjefferson wrote on Nov 5, 2008 10:08 AM:Attention all liberals! Do yourselves a favor and tune in Rush Limbaugh. The man is in rare form today. According to him, McCain lost because he wasn't conservative enough. Poor Rush sounds as if he's foaming at the mouth. I've never hear such a hateful diatribe in my life. The wingnut in chief has lost it. Priceless!

Caro Cogitatus wrote on Nov 5, 2008 10:10 AM:esteban, my friend (@7:35am),

You obviously have no idea what liberals are about, aside from the fevered rantings of Right Wing radio.

Cut the hyperbole and maybe talk to a liberal before you expose your ignorance.

I may disagree with almost everything conservatives have to say, but I still maintain that America needs conservative voices just as much as liberal ones.

Tell ya what. How about if Obama ends up with 2 or more Republican cabinet members, you rabid conservatives here pause for a moment and consider the possibility that Obama is working for all of us, and we should seek out the solutions where we agree, and comp