He may be leading in the polls in the California gubernatorial contest, but that’s because our media have seen fit to all but ignore his record as governor in the 1970s and his bizarre statements over the past three decades. If this contest were to turn on Jerry Brown, Meg Whitman would win in a landslide.
I mean, bringing Jerry Brown in to fix Sacramento today is like having a man wear a leisure suit (and a moth-eaten one at that) to a job in Silicon Valley. His governing philosophy comes straight out of the 1970s.
Hardly the man we need to fix a state which repeatedly faces budget “shortfalls” and where public employee unions all but control the state legislature. Before his first election to public office, the state Assembly Speaker spent his career working for unions, having “served as political director for United Food and Commercial Workers before his election to the Assembly in 2008. His resume includes 15 years of serving labor unions, including a stint with the California Labor Federation.”
We need a governor able to stand up to the public employee unions, yet they’re out there campaigning or him. We need a governor who will rein in state spending, but Jerry Brown just wants to keep on spending:
So, basically, he wants to balance the budget and then start spending again, putting us right back in the mess we’ve been since his understudy Gray Davis’ tenure as chief executive of the Golden State.
As Hugh Hewitt put it when posting this video:
Jerry also doesn’t seem to understand why film production has fled California. It isn’t about permits, but about tax policy. Does any Democrat anywhere in the United States understand that capital and production are mobile? Can go anywhere at any time, and will?
And that’s why businesses are leaving the state, with Intel announcing that it’s building a new facility in Oregon — despite all the vacant office space in Silicon Valley. We don’t need more spending, Jerry, we need less government.
Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.