I'll agree with Matt D and say that I think it's a good thing that California has a recall clause. It does strengthen the power of the general public, it does allow them to replace a corrupt or ineffective leader. It's a good thing to have. I wish all states had a clause like that in their constitutions.
Recalls cost taxpayer money, sure, but having a bad leader that runs your state government into the ground, and then having your next electe governor spend his entire term in office trying to fix the damage his predecessor has done, isn't exactly efficient is it? When that time spent fixing all the screwups could otherwise be spent improving the state further.
I'm not speaking of Gray Davis here, I'm talking in general.
I love California, I love going there. I try to go once a year if I can because I almost always enjoy a trip there. There is good weather, and lots of things to do. The last trip I took there was last July and I had a blast. Explored alot of Orange county (part of which included getting lost on a freeway but at least it was a nice tour of the places we never see!
), as well as making the rounds to Disneyland, perhaps my favourite of all places to take a vacation. I never get tired of Disneyland.
Aside from the good things California offers they, like any other state, have their fare share of problems. I dont think these problems warrant a desire for California to secede from the union. I don't wish a major eathquake on california. I know it was a joke, but if taken seriously, we can't exactly wish injury or death upon the general population of california over some messed up government policies. For what it's worth, I've got friends in California who have their heads on very straight, and it isn't their fault that Davis or anyone else messed up the state's government. They may have voted for him, but they have the power to recall him.
Would I ever live in California?
I don't know. There's alot of factors involved in deciding whether a place is good to live in or not, and the most important decision does not rely upon the quality of the weather. There's real issues. If I had a family in California, would my children receive good education? Is the job market fairly good so that I can continue to bring food to the table for myself or anyone else in my care, over the long-term? That's a fluctating issue, no way to gauge that. How about the crime rate? Will I feel safe in California, will I feel that my family is safe?
That last one is the clincher. Depending on the area, you could be very safe or not safe at all. You would have thought a Farmer's Market was safe until what happened last July 15th I think it was (granted, that wasn't an intentional act, but still), I can honestly say that when I do go to california, I rarely feel safe at all. Is that because there's a huge crime rate there and I notice it? No. I've never seen any of the crap people talk about. Though a drive through East L.A. gave me the chills. What I have heard about, is what friends who live there tell me, and of course, the image that hollywood paints. I think about 50% of this nation's opinion of L.A., perhaps even more, is formulated almost entirely on the picture Hollywood paints for us. I'm sure there's some people in this country who look at movies and think those high-action chases through crowds of people with bullets flying and people chasing crooks to the top of buildings where a helicopter rescues them happens every day in L.A.
But I digress.
The one, single, thing that would put me off to life in california is the crime rate. I dont get a frequent sense of people being friendly in CA
. Perhaps because they're too busy with their daily lives to smile. I don't know. I do know that if you happen to accidentally look at someone where I live, they'll smile back, even if you aren't really looking at them.
In L.A., if you catch yourself looking at someone, usually they give you a very cold, "dont mess with me" stare back. This has happened to me countless times in the past. I brush it off. It doesn't mean anything to me. But it is a difference you notice. Salt Lake City, Southern Idaho, and Central Utah are entirely different worlds to L.A. Until I live there, I may not ever know what is the social norm for residents. But it does feel less friendly. But, then again that animosity may not exist at all. It's a variable because it depends ENTIRELY on your own perception.
My point is, California is different things to different people. Good place to live/bad place to live? It's entirely subjective. It depends on what you are comfortable with. But I wouldn't just slag off california and wish it gone.
I do hope Arnold wins the election, but he won't. Not showing up to that debate will cost him dearly, and the fact that he hasn't really taken a stand with any firm issues, has sealed his fate. I love how all the newspapers are quick to publish an article about Arnold touching a girl's ass in the 70s and then calling him against women's rights...or, quoting people who say he do. The obvious aim is to discredit Arnold. He's the celebrity, so obviously they have to bring him down. Don't you love the media. I dont care if Arnold had group sex in the 70s. I care about the man he is now, and if he can be an effective leader. I find it odd, but not surprising, that no newspaper or news site, is focusing on the fact that Bustamante is connected to a rather violent group in California. Of course, the papers don't care. What's their gain is slagging Bustamante off when they can go for the REAL meat they find in Arnold? Too much to resist. Anyone who says the media isn't biased is full of it.
I'm out of breath. Goodday folks.