Monthly Archives: August 2004

Reality Vs. Reality TV or “IRV me ASAP!”

Posted on August 21, 2004 by | Leave a comment

“Truth is stranger than fiction” or so goes the old saying. In today’s world a new corollary follows that “reality is stranger than reality television.” Nowhere is this more apparent than with a comparison of Showtime’s reality TV series American Candidate and the the campaign season in San Francisco this year.
First, for those of you not familiar with American Candidate a brief summary: the program is a simulated presidential election, with candidates selected by the shows producers to go through a series of trials typical to a political campaign, with one contestant “voted off” each week.
Originally conceived as a political version of American Idol, the program is now more like “Survivor.” The winner of the program receives $200,000 and a chance to “address the American people” later this summer.
Overall it’s somewhat fun to watch, if only because I happen to know two of the participants, candidate Lisa Witter and campaign manager Dean Nielsen, who give the other candidates a real run for their money. Both are longtime professionals in politics and public affairs, and it’s interesting to see them apply real-world solutions to the many challenges created by the shows producers to simulate real-world elections.
Reality, however, is providing a tale of campaign challenges and intricate interaction between candidates far more complicated than a reality TV show could produce – San Francisco’s experiment with “instant runoff voting” in a myriad of open races for city office this fall.
No less than 100 candidates are running for a handful of offices this year, and the changes created by the new voting system have yet to be fully understood or absorbed by the city’s electorate or candidates. As such, the machinations and intensity usually associated with San Francisco’s unique brand of politics just got a lot more intense, with the results in November difficult to predict.
For those of you not familiar with Instant Runoff Voting, the Los Angeles Times featured an article recently that provided a general overview of the process and its implications for the election. A more comprehensive overview can be found at SFRCV.COM goes into far more detail (but be forewarned – it’s not a speedy read and those averse to long, detailed mathematical analyses and whatnot might want to stick with the Times article.
Suffice to say, it’s a different way of voting, one that attempts to do away with costly runoff races, and allows voters to note a “second” and “third” choice for a specific office, should their preferred candidate not get enough votes to win.
I’ve been in San Francisco all week meeting with various politicos and candidates and it has become apparent that the “reality” of city elections in San Francisco provides a far more interesting tale of alliances, plots, challenges, and good old fashioned politics in an era of “ranked voting.”
Because the system allows people to make more than one choice for the job in each election, there’s a new dynamic amongst “top tier” candidates for office – rather than ignore completely the more “longshot” candidates for office, there is an incentive to be the “second choice” of supporters of these smaller campaigns to build the majority they’ll need once the process goes through. And what a process it is.
Sound complex? It is. Sound like a recipe for intrigue and drama? Hell, yes! Let the games begin!
Let’s take a look at one of the most interesting races in the city – the race for County Supervisor in District 5. Encompassing neighborhoods such as the Haight-Ashbury, and probably one of the most liberal voting districts on Earth, no less than 22 candidates are running to replace retiring Green Party incumbent Matt Gonzalez. Making this battle royale more interesting is the fact that IRV has introduced a new dynamic in the race – a spirit of cooperation between competing candidates of different ideologies.
Yes, you read that right. An example: many candidates for the same office meet weekly to discuss issues amongst themselves and interested members of the public at a “Candidate’s Collaborative.” I had the opportunity to attend one earlier this week, and it was an interesting situation to observe.
In all the years I’ve worked in politics I’ve never been to an event where people who are competing against each other spend time helping each other out, sharing information about public events, and discussing issues and the campaign season so openly. More recently, two candidates for office took this a step further and held a fundraising event to benefit both their respective campaigns for the same office. I challenge anyone to show me when that’s occurred anywhere else in the United States.
How long this spirit of cooperation will last, and how this new order will affect candidates and their behavior when the race comes down to the wire, and the urge to win kicks in, remains to be seen. It will also be interesting to see how the voters react to the new system – will they fully embrace the opportunities it presents, or will the difficulty in explaining the system make it fall by the wayside? I am keeping close tabs on this race and will post additional columns as they warrant.
Documentary film company, American Beat is covering the campaign as it unfolds, attending events and following candidates around the city in this new political order, often unimpeded by PR people and candidate staff (as in the case of the “Candidate Collaborative” meeting earlier this week).
Although the task of covering so many candidates running at once is a challenge, they aim to document as best as they can the unique drama and interaction real life provides. Needless to say, I’ll be looking for the DVD of this film once it comes out, sometime in 2005, as an interesting contrast of real-world politics to reality TV. This election will be fun to follow, as the national elections degenerate into the ugly rumor mongering and vitriol that I’m beginning to get tired of. Stay tuned.
P.S.: While this article focused on the colorful candidacies and the impact of Instant Runoff Voting in ultra-liberal District 5, I want to take a moment to highlight another candidate in San Francisco’s more independent/conservative District 7 who deserves some special recognition.
Christine Linnenbach, an attorney and crusader for honest government, has been on the front lines challenging corruption and back-room deals at City Hall, in particular regarding the safety of Sutro Tower in San Francisco. Named a “Local Hero” by the San Francisco Bay Guardian, she would bring an intelligent and thoughtful voice to the Board of Supervisors.
Even for those of you who don’t live in San Francisco should consider sending her some support, as we need more people who are willing to stand up against civic corruption and be a voice for the people, not well-connected special interests. Go Christine!
© 2003-2006 Greg Dewar | All Rights Reserved | Originally Published at www.schadelmann.com

Leave a comment

Posted in Instant Runoff Voting FAIL, Politics of Political Reform

The Mudane Aspects of My Life Warrant a Script

Posted on August 13, 2004 by | Leave a comment

Time to lighten the mood around here on a sunny Friday…
I’ve decided that it does not take an extraordinary life, necessarily, to find things to write about that will engage the Hollywood machine and get you paid. When I look at some of the odd, strange, and bewildering choices made for the “content” (gotta love that generic description of all things creative) in TV and movies, I realized that one does not have to live an extraordinary life to find inspiration that motivates one to write the works that get produced – one only has to take the mundane up a few notches. So I’ve decided my happy, yet uneventful existence warrants a film.
For the newer readers, a bit of background. Several months ago I wrote about my duel via cellphone and land line with the mysterious Lucky, Adam, and Adam’s friends to great comic effect.
I’d somehow ended up with a cell phone one digit off the mysterious Adam, and to this day still receive calls from wayward Friends of Adam, who have those new cellphones with the tiny buttons that allow one to hit the “4” instead of the “1” at a critical juncture. More recently, I had an entertaining conversation with “Adam’s” mother. Ha ha.
Today, however, I discovered that not unlike a bad Hollywood thriller starring Some Up and Coming Doofus, I and the mysterious “Adam” are no longer guys with similar phone numbers – we are, it seems, in a bizarre duel, possibly to the death in an array of plot twists and turns worthy of an Eszterhaus, in the System.
How, you ask, can I come up with such an over-dramatic and off topic premise? Simple. I went shopping at Von’s today. And there my descent into Hell (or at least Heck?) began…
Those who know me, know that I’m a value conscious consumer. Regardless of my financial status in life, I’m a perpetual bargain hunter. I’ve long ago conceded a part of my life to the maniacal folks who decide what things will be on sale when if, and only if, you have one of those precious discount cards issued by Von’s, Ralph’s, Albertson’s, etc. Sure, I know I’m being manipulated, and sure my purchases for the last 10 years have been recorded at a computer buried under Cheyenne Mountain, but I don’t care. Sometimes, a bargain’s a bargain, and even the most antidistablishmentarian hippie can’t pass it up.
Today was no exception. For those not in the Southern California area, Von’s has an incredible deal on pizza – only $5 gets you a pizza that will last a single guy like me a week, and it’s good quality too – not some putrid pile of toppings that makes you ill and regretful the next day.
So I headed on over to the Von’s in Santa Monica (the same one John Kerry visited during the strike to take advantage of that and other deals.
To make a long story short (too late!) I punched in my home telephone number and saw the savings roll in on my pizza and other items. Woo hoo! But then I got a strange jolt at the end when the kind woman at Von’s (who is required to be nice under company policy OR ELSE!) said “Thank you Mr. Feinberg and have a great day!”
What?
Not wanting to hold up the line, I didn’t want to say anything. After all, I did get my discount. So why rock the boat? I went home and took a look at the receipt. I saw the name on the receipt, thanking me for my patronage:
“Adam Feinberg.”
This was getting strange. Now, I knew that the Mysterious Adam and I had cell phone numbers one digit off each other – was it now possible that he and I also had home numbers one digit off too? That was just too strange. I could have sworn I punched in my home number properly (and no, I wasn’t “hepped up on goofballs” or anything to confuse said keypad entry). But there it was. Once again, Adam and I were linked in some bizarre Matrix-like way via the myriad of numbers that defines our existence.
Yes, that’s a tad dramatic. No, I am not making this up for the sake of filling column space. Really.
It was then and there as I sat at my desk, considering the situation, that I realized that in fact I had the basis for a really good “bad” movie – a timely tale of how The Man and The System can get to you via your Preferred Customer cards and such. It would be like that oh-so-timely and brilliant film The Net but this time, instead of Sandra Bullock and that “new” Internet thing to play off of, we could play off of Von’s Club cards, and have Jack Black star as me in this new, and wacky adventure?
It’s at this moment I decide a an ice cold Pabst is in order to get perspective.
But when you think about it, how mundane are most stories we see on TV and the movies today? How many ways can you see a murder decoded with quippy remarks about dead bodies before you start to wonder if perhaps things are getting a tad repetitive?
And when do you decide to cash in on said mundaneness with your own life and when do you decide that contributing to the decline and fall of culture isn’t worth the money?
All I know is the next time I got to Von’s I’m buying some seriously wacky stuff and have it blow poor “Adam’s” record with the Vons megalopolis. Let him explain why he buys Pabst Blue Ribbon and all sorts of weird party favors. Or something. At least it will make for good conversation with his friends when they call….
© 2003-2006 Greg Dewar | All Rights Reserved | Originally Published at www.schadelmann.com

Leave a comment

Posted in California Life

Let’s Analyze Today’s Doublespeak: A Primer

Posted on August 11, 2004 by | Leave a comment

Just when you thought the wacky campaign of Ralph Nader could not get any wackier, today’s San Francisco Chronicle gave us a sample of the doublespeak the desperate politco, with a tenuous grip on reality, employs to mislead the public and the press.
While it would be easy to use this as a springboard for yet another example of the politically suicidal inadequacies of Ralph Nader & Co., instead it’s a better opportunity to take a look at slippery rhetoric, and see how easy it is for someone to put out “spin” that sounds good, and does not get questioned by the press.
After reading today’s accounts I had to say I was impressed by Kevin Zeese’s twisted-tongue logic. He has a future selling HMOs and Wal-Mart rezoning requests with the new heights he’s acheived in doubleplus ungood speak.
First, let’s take a trip in the Wayback Machine, for the background to this story not provided for in the San Francisco Chronicle. For those of you who have lives, and as such do not follow the pettiness and irrelevance of the Nader 2004 effort, Mr. Nader’s campaign has once again failed to get on a state ballot, in this case, California. Unable to get enough signatures from registered voters who live in Califronia, Nader will not apper as a presidential candidate choice this fall.
This is entirely due to the fact that Ralph Nader made a specific decision to run as an “independent” candidate, and not as a candidate of the Green Party, for many reasons, most of which made little to no sense. Instead he chose to “go it alone,” especially when many Green Party and Nader 2000 supporters indicated they would not support him this time. So he thought he could do it all himself.
Big mistake. Since then he’s had to throw in his lot with an odd mix of arch-conservative Republicans, and the half-dead remains of the old Reform Party, in an attempt to stitch together a semblance of a campaign. As this half-baked effort floundered, he asked for the endorsement of the Green Party at their Convention in Wisconsin this summer and lost, due mostly to his unwillingness to campaign for the support of assembled delegates – or even to attend the convention itself. Once again, Ralph’s political bumbling cost him more support, and the Green Party nominated someone else.
There’s our historical context. Basically Ralph Nader is entirely responsible for the decisions he made time and time again to get to where he is today. Had he been a better candidate, and perhaps had better advisors or at least had the political sensibilities of someone in the 21st century, he might be in a better position, but he’s not . Boo Hoo.
Now, let’s take another look at some of the spin in today’s Chronicle and see just how convoluted it is. The California Green Party chose not to invoke some (odd) rules to change their party’s nominee here in California for the sake of Saint Ralph, instead opting to go along with what its party members had decided earlier this year.
Upon hearing this news, Nader Spokes-bot Kevin Zeese pulled out a uniquely Orwellian piece of rhetoric:
“What you’re seeing is a lot of angry California Greens, that they’re  having David Cobb shoved down their throat,” Zeese said. “It’s become an  issue of basic democracy for the Green Party.”
So let me get this straight. The Greens elected someone else to be their nominee. Ralph Nader, who is not a Green, asked for a decision by executive fiat to overturn an election he lost, so that he could be the nominee and crash the party. And somehow we’re to accept the Green Party is “having David Cobb shoved down [the Green Party’s] throat?”
After ten-plus years in politics, I still don’t know how someone can get up in the morning and say something as patently false as this, and still have some respect for themselves, much less face the press and the public and think they’re going to have any credibility.
More bewilidering to me is why anyone in the press would listen to either the crybaby candidate or the crybaby spokes-bot after these, and many other duplicitous statements.
What’s also interesting is that Spokes-bot Zeese doesn’t get any of this half-baked nonsense challenged, or even questioned. You’d think that any political reporter, even half-aware of the historical context of the situation, would at least ask a few follow up questions to make this clown back up such a Stalin-esque statement. Instead the reporters put David Cobb on the defensive, and yet he’s done nothing wrong.
More interesting is the focus (clearly a byproduct of spin by the Nader campaign and allied Green activists) that somehow Nader’s attempts are part of a plan to get enough votes nationally to “get money” from the federal government as part of the public financing given to Presidential candidates. This is a new spin that’s popping up, both in this article, and in television coverage of a Nader appearance in Los Angeles a few weeks ago.
This is a more insidious lie, one that is harder to thwart. Unlike Spokes-bot Zeese’s earlier comments, these are more murky. But there are a few basic facts to consider:
1. “Funding” that comes as a result of a Nader candidacy (unlikely as that may be) would not help the Green Party of America in any way shape or form since he’s not a Green Party candidate this year.
2. It is unlikely we’ll be having public funding as we know it for any more presidential campaigns after this one, given the many challenges to the system as is, and the fact that it is under-funded. Also, Gov. Dean showed that it was possible to raise lots of money with small donations, and no financing – something Nader only dares dream of.
3. Cynical appeals to get public money need to be thoroughly investigated. Given Nader’s manipulative fundraising one has to wonder if these appeals are just meant to deceive good Greens who want to build their party to support Nader.
In fact it’s more likely that if on some weird off-chance Nader took control of any public money, it would more likely end up in the hands of Nader-allied consultants and groups as was the case with Pat Buchanan’s past campaigns for president.
It’s becoming increasingly obvious that Nader’s campaign is not nearly the threat it was to Democrats four years ago. Now that people are holding Nader to the same strict standards of conduct and the same level of political combat real candidates have to endure, he’s got neither the political sense, or the ability to take the heat a credible candidate for president needs to have to win.
It’s also becoming clear that his appeal does not extend past the handful of old-school leftists who would never cast a vote for John Kerry, and as such aren’t going to be the boon to Bush that Rove, Nader, and the gang were hoping for.
At the rate Nader and Company are going, they’ll be nothing more than an asterisk of history, and it’s time for good folks to finish this guy off politically so we won’t have to listen to any more his or Spokes-bot Zeese’s yammering and whining.
© 2003-2006 Greg Dewar | All Rights Reserved | Originally Published at www.schadelmann.com

Leave a comment

Posted in Debunking Politicos Pundits + Spin

Politics and Music, Part XXVVII

Posted on August 5, 2004 by | Leave a comment

This week a number of high profile organizations announced some equally high profile music concerts aimed squarely at the presidential race. In the past there have been celebrities on all sides who’ve helped out campaigns or causes, but this marks the first cycle where we’ve seen so many larger-scale events, with many musicisans who don’t usually do this sort of thing. It’s an interesting phenomenon, and it makes me wonder if in fact we’re seeing something permanent to the scene, or if politics is the “fashionable” thing to do this year.
In Los Angeles, the RedefeatBush.com team is putting together an all-acoustic show, entitled Unplug Bush at the El Rey Theater on August 10th.
The Redefeatbush.com folks seem to have a knack for organizing events that appeal to a younger, more alternative crowd – but they don’t just put on a good show, they also get people to actually do something while having fun. If you live in the greater LA area and are looking for something fun to do, buy a ticket online and you might even see me there lending a hand.
Also interesting was the announcement that Bruce Springsteen agreed to headline the Moveon.org PAC concert tour this fall. Springsteen has been asked by both parties to participate in elections since the 80s but he has always declined to do so for various reasons. Thus it was significant that he’s finally decided to come out of the woodwork, and has done so in support of a group like MoveOn.
I have to admit, I was rather surprised, not in a “good” way or a “bad” way, just surprised to see he was getting involved so publicly. I’ve seen this over and over again – people who never get involved in the process are voluntarily getting involved in the process like never before. It’s fortunate we have so many options and organizations for people to choose from to do so, because quite frankly, I don’t know that aging party apparatuses (apparatii?) have the ability to assimilate so many diverse people into their ranks and put them to work.
In an era of 527s, and other assorted organizations, we now finally have more and more ways for more and more people to get involved the way that is best for them. The whiners and killjoys in politics may bemoan so many new groups, but it’s safe to say that without ’em we’d be stuck with too much “politics as usual” (i.e. boring) – and that’s no fun for anyone!
© 2003-2006 Greg Dewar | All Rights Reserved | Originally Published at www.schadelmann.com

Leave a comment

Posted in Campaign Tactics & Analysis

We Recalled Gray Davis and Promptly Forgot Why

Posted on August 2, 2004 by | Leave a comment

Reading coverage of Governor Doofinator is like reading something written by the lead guy in that movie Memento. Don’t remember that movie? Here’s a quick summary – a guy who gets total amnesia every 15 minutes stumbles through a series of misadventures, unable to place anyone or anything in any context, since he can’t remember anything for very long.
Which is what we get nowadays with all the “coverage” of “news” in Sacramento. People cover our fair Governor, usually giving him a free pass with every news conference, and the fallout from each little deal, each proposal, and every smiling photo op is chronicled. Yet we never, ever read any of this in any sort of historical context, and never once are we shown a comparison of why we were told we needed to recall our elected Governor, what was promised, and what we’re actually getting from Sunny Governor Doofinator.
Thus, our governor is allowed a free pass on breaking just about every promise he made to get there, and the end result is that we’re not getting anything different than if we’d kept Gray Davis in office – aside from an actor’s smile and popularity and a little “R” next to his name to make some folks happier than others. More to the point, our Governor gets a pass on a lack of ability we’ve attacked others for pretty quickly.
Fervent critics of Governor Davis and other Catholic Democrats for their stands on abortion, gay marriage, and other issues give a sitting GOP Governor with the same views a pass, in an odd and mysterious gap in otherwise consistent criticism (which is their right). The press and the political establishment give this guy more passes than any other governor in recent memory – which is great for the Governor, but no one else.
That’s why I coined the nickname “Doofinator” for him when he got into office – his image is significantly different than past politicos, but when you look inside, you see the same old hocus pocus that both parties have been dishing out for some time now – and the results to date haven’t been too great. He’s very funny to watch, and he comes up with clever lines – but when it comes to really putting in the time or effort or work to run the state, he’s just coming up short when we needed something a little more than a Republican Gray Davis in office.
Many early predictions seemed to come true, much to my dismay, and more recent analyses bear out my view – this guy is no more a reformer than any one of number of boring, groupthink politicos – he just has a better smile and a better image.
I’m not ashamed to admit that when I first heard of the concept of a Schwarzenegger candidacy, back in 2002, I’d wondered (and hoped) he’d be a good governor given his business acumen and an ability to chart a political course that did not require him to placate any particular party’s “goof-ball” wing. Heck, he could have run as non-partisan candidate and won outright, I’m convinced.
More to the point, I’d assumed that someone with his money and popularity could do an end run around the Usual Suspects and enact some real reforms that could undo the crazy-quilt of laws and contradictory legislation that makes California budgeting almost impossible. If nothing else, it would have been nice to see someone end the folly that we have now whereby local taxes are taken away by the state at will, screwing over local authorities because Sacramento’s politicos can’t get their act together.
That was then. Now we have a record to judge, and from my perspective, keeping in mind the promises of less than a year ago and avoiding the selective amnesia consultants, pundits, and reporters seem to enjoy, it looks like all we’ve done is trade in one short-term thinker for another, and the long term future of our state is once again being mortgaged by both parties for the sake of feel-good deals. Nothing has changed, not even the nonstop chase for campaign cash, maligned under Davis as “coin-op” government, but those very same practices are praised under Governor Doofinator. This is better HOW?
Unlike most partisan pundits, I hate it when I’m right about stuff like this because in the end I don’t really care anymore if there’s a D or an R next to someone’s name – I just want someone to not be a BS’er in office and to try and cut the Gordian Knot that is California State Government and restore some sense of balance and reason to the debate.
Thus, seeing the Governor fumble the ball with this great opportunity to set things right is no reason for me to cheer – as a Californian, it’s depressing to watch, especially after having gone through the high-priced recall spectacle, paid for by car alarm millionaires, special interests, and of course, we taxpayers.
Many people have called Gov. Doofinator a “strong leader,” but when you start reading about just how he’s conducted himself during his first budget negotiations, you quickly realize he’s a very thin-skinned Hollywood celebrity who is used to having people do what he says without question.
That’s fine when you’re a self-employed businessman and mega-movie star who consistently ensures box office revenues and DVD sales, but when you’re a Governor, you have to realize that you’re not the only one in charge, and we still live in a government of checks and balances. It’s all well and good to complain about how things aren’t always perfect when you’re a plain citizen – but when someone becomes Governor, the buck stops with them, and simply deciding that because people aren’t all bowing down in unison for the Governor, that means that it’s time to make them do so via constitutional changes, doesn’t say much about said Governor’s “leadership.”
It’s also clear that when anyone starts to demonstrate any opposition to his plans or challenges Our Tough Governor, he tends cuts and run, like he did when he caved into the all-powerful prison guards union (a move worthy of Gov. Gray!).
A more memorable capitulation was when heangered pet advocates after proposing to cut short the number of days strays got to stay in pet shelters to save a few bucks. The same governor who dished out some cute zingers about “girlie men” in the Legislature apparently was unable to stand up to a cute little puppy with a “Don’t Kill Me Arnold” sign?
Not exactly a “bold leader” when you can dish it out, but can’t take it. Surely the Doofinator can take a few bad jokes at his expense? Or maybe I’m assuming too much? Didn’t they used to say Gray Davis was thin skinned and humorless too? How is this better? Remind me?
So far, he’s made proposals to steer more power into the executive branch, for short term personal gain, as he has with his so-called legislative reforms, or his alleged reorganization of state government that’s nothing more than transferring more power to the executive branch in the name of efficency.
Great for the Governor in the short term, makes for great headlines, and Republicans get a short term boost, but once again, short term thinking could lead to some dangerous long term Unintended Consequences, which we see every time ill-thought out structural reforms compound the problems we’ve got today.
Think about it this way (especially my good friends in the Republican Party) – sure such reforms could help Gov. Doofinator today – but in the end the GOP will be kicking itself senseless when one day a Governor Democrat takes office and uses the office to do what they want – and they can’t stop them no matter what happens. And don’t say it can’t happen – remember how the GOP posthumously gave FDR the finger by limiting presidential terms – only to see it come to harm Republican incumbents ever since.
I’ll be honest – sure I nickname the Governor “Doofinator” and I’ve been critical of his administration so far. But unlike partisans who attack the governor for their own gain, I get nothing out of this. My criticism comes from another place – that of someone who started to actually believe in the promise that things might get better despite my misgivings, and being disappointed when another faux revolutionary is exposed as a Usual Suspect cloaked in Hollywood fabrications. It’s depressing to read and see another train wreck in slow motion when you realize that it doesn’t have to be this way. Especially with someone like the Governor.
Ultimately the big loser is not the Governor, it’s the people of California, who have passed on a chance to do something now, before it’s too late. When we’re paying higher taxes and seeing the results of deferred leadership in the next few years, ultimately we will have ourselves to blame for not demanding more than a sunny smile and a glib one liner from someone who had a moment in time to do something that was a challenge to the status quo – and not yet another bag of tricks to pass along today’s problems to tomorrow’s leaders. That’s easy to do in the “Memento” world of politics of today – but as we all know the easy thing isn’t always the right thing to do.
Maybe the Democrats need to recruit a Pound Puppy to run against the Governor in 2006 (hey, we can even get some ads up on TV right away!) Seems like either a pup or a prison guard seem to be the only ones that can beat this guy. That 80s revival is underway – by 2006 we’ll be seeing Pound Puppies: The Next Generation on TV…sounds like we have a plan?
For more fun and games, check out Arnold Watch, created by the Foundation for Taxpayer and Consumer Rights in Santa Monica. Also ,the LA Daily News has an assessment of Governor D’s tenure here, that’s interesting to read.
© 2003-2006 Greg Dewar | All Rights Reserved | Originally Published at www.schadelmann.com

Leave a comment

Posted in Gov. Doofinator's Follies