Filet of California

So once more there is a proposal circulating around seeking to split California into two states. According to everyone's favorite unverifiable source, Wikipedia, 27 different versions of something like this have been put forth in the past. They all fell short for one reason or another. This time, former Assemblyman Bill Maze has come up with what I consider a much more useful proposal. One which would sever the liberal leech part from the conservative tax paying part. A split which would result in "Western California" and "California". Apparently my side gets to keep the current name. :)

If you look at the image accompanying this entry, you'll quickly note that the proposal aims to split the state with 13 coastal counties, appropriately, on the left side of the red line with the other 45 on the right side. Anyone who knows even a small amount about California politics will see two things: 1. The left side will get all the liberals who are already deciding everyone's fate, and 2. The right side will get all the farmland, water, and other resources the left side leeches off of every day to pay for their wacky policies.

I'm sure you can probably guess I'm in favor of this move, as it will restore a voice to conservatives in California who have been driven to the sidelines by Los Angeles and San Francisco for decades. What these two cities want for the entire state is often not in line with what those of us living in the backbone of the state want. High taxes, massive government spending, welfare for illegals, lunatic energy policy, billions wasted on bureaucracy, power grabs perpetrated by the teachers unions and others, and generally restrictive laws passed which make no sense. Anyone who has watched the news lately knows that liberalism run amok has destroyed the economy here. An economy driven mainly by the farming in the Central Valley and Inland Empire.

So it makes sense. Split the state into the two parts which will best represent those who live in them. So if San Francisco liberals wish to continue massive taxation and spending and creating deficits so large even Obama is impressed, let them. They should not be allowed to build them on the backs of those of us in the 45 counties where all of the income and tax base is actually coming from. We pay for the liberalism that's been ruining our state since the end of the Carter administration. Instead, in our new California, we'd be able to elect conservative representatives to our own state government. We'd be able to end the insane taxation, insane government waste, and insane intrusions on our daily lives. If they want our water, they'll get to pay for it like other states do.

The Democrats are already putting forth efforts to quash this effort by getting their liberal media whores to cry about how it would mean a devastation for Californians everywhere. But what they really mean is they'd not have us to leech money from and would have to face up to their own problems without our help. Not to mention the Dems don't want conservatives being able to elect 2 new senators, several new House representatives, and splitting their precious 55 electoral vote block into two which would then reveal where Californians really stand.

It's time to do something. It's time to let the lefties be lefties on their new left coast. Let's split California and show the rest of the USA what it means to run a state the right way.

Oh yes, and I'm in one of the lucky counties who gets to go to the new, truly red, California. :)

For more information, see the movement's website at:
"It is pointless to resist, my son." -- Darth Vader
"Resistance is futile." -- The Borg
"Mother's coming for me in the dragon ships. I don't like these itchy clothes, but I have to wear them or it frightens the fish." -- Thurindil

Well. I guess that's that then.

« Worst Day Ever
Daylight Stupidity Time »

Posted on Feb 26, 2009 11:45 pm by Samson in: | 14 comment(s) [Closed]
Ah... John Phillips, you old ignorant dog you. Is that the best counterargument you have? The 45 county side would lose all access to air and sea ports? Live in a bubble much? Did you perhaps forget about John Wayne Airport in Cosa Mesa? Or Ontario International? Or San Diego International? What about the Coronado Bay docks and the naval bases and stuff down in San Diego? Did you even read the guy's plan before interviewing him and then promptly insulting him by calling us "Appalatiafornia"?

For those who don't know, John Phillips is a talk radio host on KABC and he apparently had Bill Maze on last night and were discussing this very subject, only I was only vaguely aware of it when the "split the state" stuff got mentioned. John's comment wasn't made until after they concluded the interview and Mr. Maze was off the air. Which only goes to show that Mr. Phillips didn't have the guts to say it to the guy while he was still on the phone and had already made up his mind well before hand that the plan was "a stupid idea" in his words. He obviously hadn't bothered to do his research or he'd have realized we'd be taking 3 major airports along with everything in Coronado Bay.

Three? I thought Fresno had an airport too.. maybe that one doesn't count as major.. and I know there are quite a few smaller airports within those 45 counties as well... the part of California I lived in, years ago, was Tulare county which I'm pleased to note would still be California under this proposal and would be my first choice of counties to move back to should I ever move back into that state.

I don't know enough about NorCal to know which cities have what airports, but yes. We'd have Fresno and Sacramento airports too.

One question I didn't see raised anywhere is where the capitol for the new 13 county state would be. I'd presume San Francisco just cause it'd be easier. And it wasn't addressed if the 45 county state would keep its capitol in Sacramento either.

Perhaps the capitol of California would simply remain the same so less would have to be changed by the cartographers and the capitol of Western California could be determined by a vote like everything else those folks ever have to decide about, and they could even let their favorite liberal judges redecide after the popular poll so they'd have cause to hold the election a second time just for assurance sake. ;)

Be a cold day in Hell before this ever happens.

Plus it would F up the flag. If you don't like your blue state, move to a red one, whiners! :p

I forgot to log in. I'm a dumbass.

Actually we like our red state just fine. We'd just like to run it as a red state instead of letting those 13 coastal counties run it as though it were a blue state. The plan seems to have legs out here. More and more of the radio people are discussing it, which means it may have a shot at getting on the ballot.

Well, Michigan often goes blue, but has one or two counties in the entire state that actually vote blue. Detroit make the choices for the entire state, pretty much, sinse more than half the state's population lives there. I'm pretty sure that's how any state works, not just California.

Tyche [Anon] said:
Comment #9 Mar 9, 2009 6:54 am
And since 47% of metro Detroit is functionally illiterate...heh
Well we're not much better here with 1/4 of Ohio's population in Cleveland with a 38% illteracy rate.
I guess it makes sense that the bulk of illiterates vote democrat.

Wow. Where are you getting those numbers? That seems pretty darn ridiculous. I mean, I know there are slums and whatnot, but you're saying almost half of the millions of people that live in Detroit are illiterate? That's hard to swallow.

Also, since. I have no idea what a sinse is, but it's probably bad. Also, probably makes, but I could argue that Detroit was a reference to its citizens, thus being plural. Yeah.

And where is it written that 4/5 of the state should be at the mercy of one or two cities just because that's where all the liberals live and hold enough population in both places to get a 51% majority? LA and SFO do not get to dictate to the rest of us just because they want welfare statism for illegal aliens while at the same time stealing our resources and taxing our properties to pay for it.

Well, you said it yourself. If liberals make up 51% of the state's population, it only make sense that the state votes liberal. So if you're fed up with not having your voice count, go somewhere that conservative outnumber liberals. Of course it will be pointless since one person won't make any difference at all, but maybe the policies of that state will better suit your tastes.

There just isn't a reason to split up a state because you aren't happy with its political leaning. Or even because 49% of the people aren't.

Yes, actually there is a reason, a very good reason. That reason being that those 13 counties don't represent those of us living in the other 45. Liberals don't make up 51% of the state's population either. Most of the districts in California have been gerrymandered to rig state congressional elections in favor of liberal candidates. Split the assholes who keep this system going away from us and they will no longer be able to force their will upon those of us who don't want to live our lives according to their disgusting politics and amoral ways while at the same time insisting that we all pay for it for them. It's either going to be that or organize a violent revolution to oust the current government of the state.

*sigh* If only organizing a full scale popular revolt were that simple, we'd already have an entirely new U.S. Government in place, like our forefathers did, a decade or so ago.

<< prev 1 next >>
Comments Closed
Comments for this entry have been closed.

Forgot Password?

1 2 3 4 5 6 7
8 9 10 11 12 13 14
15 16 17 18 19 20 21
22 23 24 25 26 27 28