Comments on: Bloggers blast Bass ’bout budget boondoggle

By: Elwood

Elwood — Wed, 17 Jun 2009 05:41:40 +0000

“completely subjective and not too bright”

Sounds like you’re describing your own post.

By: Plaidsportcoat

Plaidsportcoat — Mon, 15 Jun 2009 09:29:35 +0000

My vote did not “mean cut spending and don’t raise taxes” AT ALL – and neither did the vote of my friends! so there’s no way you can interpret it that way if you care to be in touch with reality. That’s completely subjective and not too bright. In fact, that’s the problem with people – not thinking things through intelligently. My “NO” votes all meant – raise taxes on corporations and the wealthy, raise fees, get rid of arnold and the 2/3 requirement.

By: Carol

Carol — Sat, 13 Jun 2009 16:22:05 +0000

I agree this is heading toward disaster. I would be glad to have someone in charge that will get the job done. The vote was clear to me cut spending and don’t raise taxes.

By: Ralph Hoffmann, Guest Columnist

Ralph Hoffmann, Guest Columnist — Sat, 13 Jun 2009 03:17:51 +0000

Just as Corporations are too big to fail, so is CA. Better CA be split into 3 parts, N CA, Central CA, and Southern CA, as each has different interests.

By: John W

John W — Fri, 12 Jun 2009 20:36:20 +0000

This is shaping up as another standoff, with disastrous consequences. If there is such a thing as going into default and putting a “special master” in charge, my guess is people would welcome just having somebody make decisions.