Take a look at this chart:
Via Willisms via Instapundit.
So, the second largest state (in terms of population) leads in private sector jobs created while the largest state lead in private sector jobs lost. Seems California could learn something from Texas.
One thing we do know: it’s time California try something new instead of turn to politicians who have been around the block a few times. Please join me in helping out Meg Whitman and Carly Fiorina, newcomers to the political scene who know what it takes to keep a private enterprise up and running.
Hmm, socially moderate California, a fiscal disaster area, while socially conservative Texas has their economic house well in order. Doesnt fit the narrative though , does it?
If insanity is doing the same thing over and over expecting a different result does that make the voters or the elected class in California nuts?
Hey, California has lots of square miles, a coastline and a border with Mexico. It has deserts and mountains. And other stuff. Bet you didn’t think of that.
No wonder Texas is different.
AE, I’m not convinced there is any such thing as a social moderate/fiscal conservative except for maybe Chris Christie. Arnold was supposed to be the model social moderate/fiscal conservative and he jacked up spending over 40%.
The aforementioned Arnold polishes the turd that is the California State Budget.
heliotrope, not sure if you meant your comments to be sarcastic but….
Texas has coastline with the Gulf of Mexico, West Texas has mountains, Palo Duro Canyon (second only to the Grand Canyon) and Ben Bend National Park are stunning natural ranges. We have marshes, wetlands, piney woods and the Texas Hill Country.
We also have the longest boarder with Mexico (we proudly talk of our Texicans).
Texas is socially conservative but NOT judgmental….we are a “my private life is my private life”. We believe in the constitution which gives rights to ALL. If you are a good Texan you have the respect of all other Texans.
One other HUGE difference is that Texas uses our natural resources to benefit all of the USA.
Texas has no state income tax and is one of the easiest states to start your own business.
I wasn’t born in Texas but I got here as fast as I could!
Jay,
If Texas can do it, California can do it. My comment was meant to mimic the whining liberal who can conjure up any reason whatsoever to blame things on his “victim” status.
By the way, if California doesn’t want Carly or Meg we will sure welcome them with a big Texas hug!
I voted for Meg and Carly via absentee ballot, but I’m not convinced that they can truly fix the high unemployment. Neither promote the passing of Proposition 23, the global warming legislation repeal. Without passage of Prop. 23, many many jobs will be lost to the new onerous green regulation and taxes. The California Republican Party did not promote passage. In fact, I received a mailer from an independent Republican organization that recommends a No vote for Prop 23. The state is LOST. If Brown and Boxer wins, it will be “lights out”.
From a statistical POV, the chart you show isn’t that meaningful because it backloads more years during good economic time than bad. It would be more helpful to see the graph from Jan 2008 to present. Then again, California was losing jobs before that, so I guess I’ll take back my criticism.
The only thing that keeps me from moving to Texas is the climate.
That’s the Achilles’ Heel of the extreme form of the thesis, “There are none! There can never be any!!!1!” To disprove it, takes only one.
V, from your link:
Which is one definite step in the right direction. But OK, yes I would swap Ahnuld for Christie if I could, in a heartbeat.
Yes, that’s my point V. Dan keeps insisting we must let the social moderates lead the party, and I’m simply pointing out that the social moderates he wants to lead ARE the FISCAL moderates that destroyed the party.
He is on a crusade to destroy the Reagan coalition in favor of a more socially liberal coalition in a country where more than twice as many Americans identify as conservative than identify as liberal or moderate. In a country where overwhelmingly socially conservative demographics like blacks and hispanics are growing and the white urban liberal Democrats he erroneously believes will support Republicans if we become more socially liberal are a SHRINKING demographic.
Judging from the frequency with which me makes the argument, he has apparently made this foolishness his life’s work.
I’m simply pointing out how foolish it is.
AE, my position is a bit more nuanced. I think social cons… and I count myself one… should be respected within the coalition. There are basic principles, like the sanctity of unborn life, that cannot be compromised, although there is room to debate *how* to protect unborn life. Border Security… despite the protests of the establishment… enjoys 70% public support and it’s plain dambed foolishness to push for Amnesty a la Landslide McCain.
I think Chris Christie shows that social moderate can be accepted by the social conservatives but he has to hardcore on fiscal conservative issues. No other “social moderate” has really shown himself to be fiscally conservative. Arnold sure hasn’t. The Maine Sisters aren’t. Charlie Crist, Arlen Specter, Lincoln Chaffee … the streets are littered with the bodies of “fiscally conservative social moderates” who likee very much the borrow and spend.
I note that the Moderate RINO from Maryland’s first district, Wayne Gilchrest, has endorsed the Democrat governor. So much for the guys chanting “It’s the party, stupid.”
That depends on definitions. If you have reservations about abortion (or oppose it), does that define you as socially conservative, no matter how liberal you are on other social issues? I’m thinking here of Barry Goldwater and Ronald Reagan. Both men were more pro-gay, basically, than the social conservatives of their day wanted them to be. I would call both of them social moderates.
Others wouldn’t call them social moderates; but therein lies my point: it’s a matter of definitions. If you define “social conservative” in such a way that it cannot help but include every good fiscal conservative – and perhaps also to exclude those social conservatives who are undeniably *bad* fiscal conservatives, excluding Big Government social conservatives such as Huckabee – then you win the game. Congratulations. 😉
Social Conservatives are much more Fiscal Conservatives than Social Moderates.
Social Conservatives are against government funding of abortions and nationalized health care. They are for privatization of most things instead of more government intervention.
Social Moderates are Democratic Lite.
Are anybody here against Proposition 23? I haven’t hear a mention. No wonder California will go down the toilet despite any potential Republican win.
Mistake: Correction:
Are anybody here for passing Proposition 23 ? I haven’t hear a mention. No wonder California will go down the toilet despite any potential Republican win.
Of course Texas isn’t like Californication. We set our standards a mite higher here.
No offense to Dan, Leah, NDT et al. Just braggin’. 😉
Regards,
Peter H.
Well anon2, since you already know that my poor home state is hopelessly doomed, what would be the point in my telling you that I will be on the right side of Prop 23 (the pro-business / anti-mandate side)?
Hmmmmm. “Social conservatism” is a label that social conservatives would not choose for themselves. It is probably the construct of some liberal academic who sorts people out compared to his scheme of who is enlightened and who is clinging to Neanderthal ways.
I believe most Americans believe that the fetus is a human life. To deal with abortion and the state control of abortion, many of those same Americans will turn logic on its head for the sake of political purity. It is the relationship between abortion and the unborn human life that defines political conservatives and political liberals in issues concerning life in the womb.
Tolerating gays is not a big issue among Christians. How much tolerance of public gay activity/expression is when it becomes political. Andrew Cuomo takes his kids to a Gay Pride parade for political reasons: it is an affirmation of how politically correct he is. However, there is no social convention that establishes acceptance of the acts of gays as a functioning civil right. I suspect that Andrew Cuomo would not take his children to a Ku Klux Klan parade. The people in both parades are Constitutionally protected. So, I suspect, Cuomo makes a choice that is more political than fundamentally ethical. I would not take children in my care to a nude beach. But if I were raising my family in a manner that included nudism, I might seek out such a beach. I might insist on a fundamentalist Christian nudist colony. I might harbor ill feelings toward the nudist colony down the road where free sex after five is all the rage.
So, as a conservative, I very carefully weigh issues in which the state takes a role. I am willing for the state to establish rules for safety, purity, and effectiveness. I am willing for the state to inspect and punish for violation in the safety, purity and effectiveness rules.
But, when the state protects a smelt at the cost of millions of acres of human food production, I worry about how the Constitution got us there. In almost all cases, I find the same convoluted logic it takes to pretend that the fetus in the human mother’s womb is something other than a human life. Liberals have to lie to their fundamental common sense in order to justify their extraordinary use of state power.
Therefore, a social liberal is someone who is more enlightened than the not only the rest of us, but the Constitution, precedence and history as well.
I favor the conservative who limits the government, ties judicial decisions to the law, ties the law to the Constitution and permits society to manage itself at the local level. Fiscal conservatism automatically underlies all of this. If the town wants to tax itself to build a park, let them do it.
In sum, I prefer not to fight over what a restrictive label that floats down from above actually means.
It should be noted,expounded upon and repeated that a good chunk of the people flowing into Texas are doctors. They put a cap on malpractice and now doctors are bailing out on their states and flooding into Texas.
Man, I miss Houston. God Bless Texas.
What kind of climate do you require? You can get your snow in Dallas or Amarillo.
I was thinking, TGC, wouldn’t it be cool if some network launched a remake of ‘Dallas,’ but with a predominantly Hispanic cast? Instead of the Ewings, it would be the Bustamantes or the Cortezes… with just a smidgen of telenovela mixed in.
#24, you ought to suggest that to Sci-fi. I mean we know that Caprica is the most advanced of the 12, Gemenon seems to be a mostly mono-thestic world (ironic) Tauran is the home of the greek mafia types. Sagaterion seems to be (from BSG) a mix of rural types and outstanding types, and Scorpion seems to be known for its alcohol and drinkers. We still have several undeveloped worlds yet.
You watch Caprica? I guess somebody has to. It’s too much soap opera and not enough spaceship pr0n for me.
I need more snow than that, and I need leaves that change color in autumn.
But Amarillo averages about 18″ compared to the Baltimore-DC average of 12″. Though some parts of MD can get up to 75″.
I don’t find it soap opera as much as some of the amusing contradictions and hints they’ve put in.
That (at least some) of the monotheists are polyamourous.
The racism between the colonies.
Why does Caprica need warbots? Who are they going to war against?
Plus Bear’s music rocks and the girls are cute 😉