That doesn’t change the fact that Arnold has been a big disappointment and frankly a deceiver in so many areas, and has done LT damage to conservatism in the state. My brother and his wife insist on seeing him as “conservative.” Zheesh.

#4, So Food Stamps is the new Welfare in Cali. The only “consolation” is that it’s not as expensive as Welfare was.

That 7.7% matches the % on welfare in Cali in 1996. Ouch. I really need to dig into the Food Stamp fiasco more. In a good economy, the Food Stamp rolls going up nationally by 18% or so in the last 4 years makes no sense.

Also, the average benefit has crept up to to over $22 per person per week from the $21 the libs were using in their Food Stamp Challenge throughout this year. Finally, there’s probably room for improvement, but the admin costs, at least at the fed level, aren’t that brutal. At the state level, that might be a whole ‘nother story.

Main page: http://www.fns.usda.gov/pd/fspmain.htm

By State: http://www.fns.usda.gov/pd/15fsfypart.htm
California as of 2007 - 2,048,185 people of 26,466,181 for the US, i.e. 7.7% of all those receiving.

http://www.fns.usda.gov/pd/17fsfybft.htm
The cost of this largess: $2,569,806,318 or $2.5 billion in round numbers, what’s a few million, right?

I think it is important as we approach 2008 to look back at the events that took place during the time Arnold came forward. As various candidates emerged to run for governor, Arnold Schwarzenegger started working behind the scenes nationally to secure his position with the help of many in the entertainment and news media. Still with a significant amount of support was the stalwart Republican State Senator Tom McClintock, who incidentally is also a resolute Conservative.

In what was described as a carnival like atmosphere, Arnold used the media in effect to “steal” the show in the second statewide debate, which was the only debate he participated in. After that debate the MSM were hailing Arnold as the savior of California and like sheep to a slaughter, most republicans turned their backs on McClintock in favor of the man with no experience nor any republican credentials and gleefully went to his camp. And rest of the story appears in your posting. The charlatan wins office, has no compass, and is currently leading the state in circles out in the wilderness.

So here we are approaching 2008 and the manic atmosphere that surrounded California may not be matched, but reading the blogs, many folks have the same manic fervor for some candidates that resemble Arnold Schwarzenegger; and at the same time as seen through the polls, many republicans are endorsing the candidates with the “least” republican credentials.

Sometime we have a tendency to blame the party for its lack of republican orientation, but I think sometimes they give us what the majority wants; CHAMELEONS IN EMPTY SUITS.

I didn’t even touch Food Stamps, which may be an even worse situation. There are definitely more people on them than on TANF…..

To answer part of the reason why family size in CA is growing is due in part to state sanctioned paternity fraud. Having children is a cottage industry in CA. CA is one of the few states that simply takes the woman’s word for who is the father, then the courts promptly levy child support on the male without a paternity test. Even after the male protests and then proves via DNA that he is not the father, the court system drags it’s feet in halting the forced payments, then when the defrauded male tries to get his money back, the court says “Shame on YOU!” and won’t give it back. It’s a huge problem. What’s the incentive for the woman to make a false paternity claim? No punishment for doing so and all they need is 3 different fathers to pay child support. Why 3? Child support is NOT TAXABLE INCOME and they get 25% from each male, whereas if it was from same guy, she would only get 35% (25+5+5).

The solution is to stop letting children be a profit center, making babies for the purposes of income is immoral. What do you think the effect is of those values being taught to the children of these women? Then we wonder why 70% of the people in our prisons come from single parent families. Between TANF, food stamps, child support and EIC, it is profitable to make babies. The solution must involve serious reform of the child custody laws and the attitudes of the courts and bureaucracy:
1. no more default child custody for the mother, on the 2nd out of wedlock child, that child goes to the father by default and the mother pays child support. A strong disensentive to make babies.
2. An actual child custody hearing, not the typical show trial that occurs. The kid’s best interest, not the mother’s best interest must be considered.
3. Shared parenting, not sole custody or joint custody, with shared parenting, the kid spends half the time with each parent and ends all child support payments! No more reason for having babies just to collect a check.
4. three strike rule on judges, and all the cadre of court officials involved in deciding child custody. There are 200,000 kids a year who are abused. Half of all child abusers are hand picked by the courts. When an officier of the court is so incompetent as to pick 3 child abusers to be custodians of a child, that person must be removed from the decision making process.

Make these 4 reforms and it will revolutionize the country, within 20 years, crime will fall over 50% and the prisons will empty out. Welfare, TANF, EIC will wither and die along with unemploying all the bureaucrats needed to run these programs. Poverty is a big business in this country.