NY Times Magazine: Who Can Possibly Govern California?

Read it all.

print

Posted in * Economics, Politics, Politics in General, State Government

10 comments on “NY Times Magazine: Who Can Possibly Govern California?

  1. The_Archer_of_the_Forest says:

    My guess would involve a ghost of some dictator. Huey Long perhaps?

  2. Timothy Fountain says:

    As a birth native, four-decade resident and now refugee from the (guffaw) “Golden State,” I can tell you that the potential candidates in the article are all retreads or current denizens of the dysfunction.

    Gavin Newsome? Great. Tanked economy, crumbling infrastructure, one significant earthquake away from a humanitarian nightmare that will make the Third World look tranquil…oh, but let’s bring in a Gay Marriage guy. Just frickin’ super.

    Besides, he was married to Fox’s Kimberly Guilfoyle… he let’s her get away and you think he’s emergency leadership material? (Sorry, couldn’t resist).

  3. Jeffersonian says:

    As long as Californians – and their legislooters – keep wanting it all without having to pay for it, no one will be able to govern the state.

  4. Jeffersonian says:

    Or rather, it will be governed by its creditors.

  5. mari says:

    Oh please, not Gavin Newsom. The man might claim to have received treatment for his drug abuse and alcoholism, but he doesn’t act like it. He divorced and married a porn star, and went off the wagon. He abuses the public trust in San Francisco, has been a wastrel with taxpayer’s money.. apparently he thinks that there’s a never ending supply.

    There are so many other matters I could reference, but here’s one that still irks me. Gavin Newsom has spoken of establishing a treaty between San Francisco and China, despite the fact that the Constitution does not allow cities or states to enter into treaties with foreign governments or interests. Of course, the Los Angeles mayor Villaragosa (also a crook) has engaged in an illegal, unconstitutional treaty with Mexico.

  6. Capt. Father Warren says:

    Perhaps vote them out of the union and let them figure it out…..I don’t want to be one of those (drafted) creditors per Barney Frank. I’ll little more representation there than I do in Washington DC.

  7. Larry Morse says:

    I wonder if the continued influx of latinos will not at last determine what becomes of Cal. It may be that they are the “barbarians” who invade a state weakened by corruption, decadence and incompetence. From them, an Athanasius may arise, who will bring a new vitality, a new vigor, a simpler stronger ethos, a set of virtues arising from adversity. The numbers I have seen indicate that the influx continues and will dominate the voting base in a few years. (And mind you, I have forgotten what the actual numbers are. All I remember clearly is the consequence of the numbers) LM

  8. RalphM says:

    Who can possibly govern? One who can say “NO”!

  9. Already left says:

    If all the people in power in California ruled their own finances like they rule California they would all have been bankrupt a long time ago. It’s really not difficult: don’t spend more than you have!!!

  10. First Family Virginian says:

    I’ve seen several television ads urging a constitutional convention.