Gov Newsome and Gov Kemp involved in Chinese kickback scheme?

iceberg

Platinum Member
Joined
May 15, 2017
Messages
29,894
Reaction score
8,751
Points
490


whoah.
 

Rambunctious

Diamond Member
Joined
Jan 19, 2010
Messages
38,684
Reaction score
19,640
Points
1,905
I remember Newsome under harsh questioning by reporters over his matter...."Governor where is the Billion dollars? and what flavor of Ice Cream do you like best?"
Some think Nesome is already a one term disaster...that the moderate GOP San Diego Mayor is going to run against him and beat him easily....he is well liked in this blue state of CA....and Newsome is under fire...I'd like to see him frog marched....
 

ClaireH

Gold Member
Joined
Oct 1, 2020
Messages
430
Reaction score
403
Points
158
Location
Midwest US


whoah.
Here is a quote from Newsom that brings to light the most important aspect of this whole thing because it happens to be a factor in almost every single decision humans make, political and otherwise.

Quote regarding Newsom's decision to up CA taxpayers' bills by 30% (according to article) to cover 1 billion dollar mask bill to China: “I’m for OUTCOME here,” Newsom shot back when asked by a reporter about withholding the contract’s details. “Some are CONSUMED BY PROCESS, personality, intrigue. Who’s up, who’s down. We are for actually solving a major, major problem — not only for the state but potentially a template for the country.”

Wow...consumed by process. This guy is a bold one, I'll give him that.

Readers will be right to say that this is a well-known moral dilemma that's been going on for centuries, and that this isn't anything new. It matters more in politics, however, a lot more imo, as these are individuals who are elected to do their best job.

What does it mean to "do the right thing" when the decisions you make are not just your own, or for your family's sake but will impact an entire state? Do you focus strictly on outcome as Newsom and do whatever it takes to do it?

Is Newsom right to say that the means justify the ends? I don't think so, but still admit to having about a 10%-12% doubt.

Maybe the best answer is that it's situational, but that leaves me right where I am with this particular moral dilemma.

I've been considering this complex issue for a few years now, even when watching television shows like The 100 for instance (great show up to the end of season 5, but forget seasons 6 and 7 as they switched writers and upset about half a million fans by the change).

Side note to iceberg: can I borrow that quote you have about the opinion others have about me are not my responsibility? I love that, and fits well with it being no business of mine what others think of me...that one hit hard recently and very helpful for people pleasers like me! Thanks in advance:)
 

danielpalos

Diamond Member
Joined
Jan 24, 2015
Messages
63,171
Reaction score
2,905
Points
1,855
Location
Alta California, federalist.


whoah.
Sounds more like right wing conspiracy theory or Hoax.
 
OP
iceberg

iceberg

Platinum Member
Joined
May 15, 2017
Messages
29,894
Reaction score
8,751
Points
490


whoah.
Here is a quote from Newsom that brings to light the most important aspect of this whole thing because it happens to be a factor in almost every single decision humans make, political and otherwise.

Quote regarding Newsom's decision to up CA taxpayers' bills by 30% (according to article) to cover 1 billion dollar mask bill to China: “I’m for OUTCOME here,” Newsom shot back when asked by a reporter about withholding the contract’s details. “Some are CONSUMED BY PROCESS, personality, intrigue. Who’s up, who’s down. We are for actually solving a major, major problem — not only for the state but potentially a template for the country.”

Wow...consumed by process. This guy is a bold one, I'll give him that.

Readers will be right to say that this is a well-known moral dilemma that's been going on for centuries, and that this isn't anything new. It matters more in politics, however, a lot more imo, as these are individuals who are elected to do their best job.

What does it mean to "do the right thing" when the decisions you make are not just your own, or for your family's sake but will impact an entire state? Do you focus strictly on outcome as Newsom and do whatever it takes to do it?

Is Newsom right to say that the means justify the ends? I don't think so, but still admit to having about a 10%-12% doubt.

Maybe the best answer is that it's situational, but that leaves me right where I am with this particular moral dilemma.

I've been considering this complex issue for a few years now, even when watching television shows like The 100 for instance (great show up to the end of season 5, but forget seasons 6 and 7 as they switched writers and upset about half a million fans by the change).

Side note to iceberg: can I borrow that quote you have about the opinion others have about me are not my responsibility? I love that, and fits well with it being no business of mine what others think of me...that one hit hard recently and very helpful for people pleasers like me! Thanks in advance:)
it's simple - people care more about getting THEIR outcome and "the process" simply gets in the way. but they don't understand the process is what protects us all.

without it, they simply make it to where anyone who wants OUTCOME can do it any way they feel necessary to get THEIR desired outcome. we've looked the other way for so long what used to be wrong is at best sighed at today because we know we won't do anything about it.

which makes the entire attitude of I WANT OUTCOME justified in their eyes.

does the end justify the means. been asking ourselves that since way before camelot and does might make right or is might simply right?

i stopped watching the 100 when they all went inside and the original purpose became lost in a desire to get funky. i only made it to S3 of LOST before i simply got tired of all the fluff-drama.

where do we go from here? we have to let it take its course and hopefully people impeach him or vote him out at the next election. we have to unfortunately see first hand what this mindset does long term before we realize the short term gains are simply a myth.

as for the tagline - feel free. i'm sure i read it somewhere also and loved it for much the same reasons as you.
 

ClaireH

Gold Member
Joined
Oct 1, 2020
Messages
430
Reaction score
403
Points
158
Location
Midwest US
Thank you for linking me to your previous post. I knew this issue had to have been examined before, but I posted about it since it's relative to Newsom's actions and and public statements. I will be reading your links this evening.

The most disturbing part was Newsom's use of the phrase "consumed with process". Is he saying that it's better to be consumed with outcome and that everything goes to get there? That's how I read it. His comments should scare his constituents who voted him into office, unless of course they're just shysters themselves;) Maybe he was feeling defensive with the reporter's implications, but his words reveal that he thinks devious actions are justified if the end being sought is obtained. Geezz. That is huge! He either gave away too much due to his reactive stance, or is just really full of himself. Likely both.

I should have instantly reduced my means to an end doubt range from 10%-12% to zippo. This stat range btw, indicates where I fall on accepting means justifying the ends, and includes situations around the world where people struggle daily just to survive. They do what it takes to stay alive another day and in those cases account for that 10%-12%. In narrowing that focus down from global- to domestic- to yet again just politicians and their actions, my tolerance range regarding the use of unscrupulous tactics is at ground zero.
 
OP
iceberg

iceberg

Platinum Member
Joined
May 15, 2017
Messages
29,894
Reaction score
8,751
Points
490
Thank you for linking me to your previous post. I knew this issue had to have been examined before, but I posted about it since it's relative to Newsom's actions and and public statements. I will be reading your links this evening.

The most disturbing part was Newsom's use of the phrase "consumed with process". Is he saying that it's better to be consumed with outcome and that everything goes to get there? That's how I read it. His comments should scare his constituents who voted him into office, unless of course they're just shysters themselves;) Maybe he was feeling defensive with the reporter's implications, but his words reveal that he thinks devious actions are justified if the end being sought is obtained. Geezz. That is huge! He either gave away too much due to his reactive stance, or is just really full of himself. Likely both.

I should have instantly reduced my means to an end doubt range from 10%-12% to zippo. This stat range btw, indicates where I fall on accepting means justifying the ends, and includes situations around the world where people struggle daily just to survive. They do what it takes to stay alive another day and in those cases account for that 10%-12%. In narrowing that focus down from global- to domestic- to yet again just politicians and their actions, my tolerance range regarding the use of unscrupulous tactics is at ground zero.
obama was quoted as saying there were things he wanted to do but the constitution got in his way.

process is how we as a group agree to conduct ourselves for a desired outcome. when someone feels *their* emotional state is more important than the process, that is a very dangerous mindset. when someone does it once, they'll continue to do it and any "pushback" to this mindset is met with a greater desire to bypass process, but now to prove their mindset right, not the initial reason for wanting to go around it to begin with.

that becomes a "pawn" along the way really.

this is really what we're fighting. do you want globalism or to continue to be "on our own"?

i see no need for globalism when we can't even get along here. how could a global effort succeed?
 

MisterBeale

Platinum Member
Joined
Sep 16, 2012
Messages
28,856
Reaction score
10,460
Points
900
Thank you for linking me to your previous post. I knew this issue had to have been examined before, but I posted about it since it's relative to Newsom's actions and and public statements. I will be reading your links this evening.

The most disturbing part was Newsom's use of the phrase "consumed with process". Is he saying that it's better to be consumed with outcome and that everything goes to get there? That's how I read it. His comments should scare his constituents who voted him into office, unless of course they're just shysters themselves;) Maybe he was feeling defensive with the reporter's implications, but his words reveal that he thinks devious actions are justified if the end being sought is obtained. Geezz. That is huge! He either gave away too much due to his reactive stance, or is just really full of himself. Likely both.

I should have instantly reduced my means to an end doubt range from 10%-12% to zippo. This stat range btw, indicates where I fall on accepting means justifying the ends, and includes situations around the world where people struggle daily just to survive. They do what it takes to stay alive another day and in those cases account for that 10%-12%. In narrowing that focus down from global- to domestic- to yet again just politicians and their actions, my tolerance range regarding the use of unscrupulous tactics is at ground zero.
I just wanted to link it back to the original LA Times source. It was really buried down deep, and Google would not give that link up easy, but, despite what the left and establishment types like Toro, danielpalos, penny, ect. would have us believe, it did turn out to be a legit story as I did find the link in the end.. . . .

Both Toro and danielpalos only wanted to use name calling and ad hom to dispute the story, otherwise? Nothing.

These folks, well, not Toro, but others that swallow the CFR propaganda bitch and moan about the wealth disparity growing every day, and they really are obtuse as to why it does. . . mostly because they support the politicians and corporations that cause it to.



 

Persistence Of Memory

Diamond Member
Joined
Oct 1, 2019
Messages
5,128
Reaction score
4,173
Points
1,940


whoah.
Dernt matta. Libturds can do anything. The media sees to it.
 

ClaireH

Gold Member
Joined
Oct 1, 2020
Messages
430
Reaction score
403
Points
158
Location
Midwest US


whoah.
Here is a quote from Newsom that brings to light the most important aspect of this whole thing because it happens to be a factor in almost every single decision humans make, political and otherwise.

Quote regarding Newsom's decision to up CA taxpayers' bills by 30% (according to article) to cover 1 billion dollar mask bill to China: “I’m for OUTCOME here,” Newsom shot back when asked by a reporter about withholding the contract’s details. “Some are CONSUMED BY PROCESS, personality, intrigue. Who’s up, who’s down. We are for actually solving a major, major problem — not only for the state but potentially a template for the country.”

Wow...consumed by process. This guy is a bold one, I'll give him that.

Readers will be right to say that this is a well-known moral dilemma that's been going on for centuries, and that this isn't anything new. It matters more in politics, however, a lot more imo, as these are individuals who are elected to do their best job.

What does it mean to "do the right thing" when the decisions you make are not just your own, or for your family's sake but will impact an entire state? Do you focus strictly on outcome as Newsom and do whatever it takes to do it?

Is Newsom right to say that the means justify the ends? I don't think so, but still admit to having about a 10%-12% doubt.

Maybe the best answer is that it's situational, but that leaves me right where I am with this particular moral dilemma.

I've been considering this complex issue for a few years now, even when watching television shows like The 100 for instance (great show up to the end of season 5, but forget seasons 6 and 7 as they switched writers and upset about half a million fans by the change).

Side note to iceberg: can I borrow that quote you have about the opinion others have about me are not my responsibility? I love that, and fits well with it being no business of mine what others think of me...that one hit hard recently and very helpful for people pleasers like me! Thanks in advance:)
it's simple - people care more about getting THEIR outcome and "the process" simply gets in the way. but they don't understand the process is what protects us all.

without it, they simply make it to where anyone who wants OUTCOME can do it any way they feel necessary to get THEIR desired outcome. we've looked the other way for so long what used to be wrong is at best sighed at today because we know we won't do anything about it.

which makes the entire attitude of I WANT OUTCOME justified in their eyes.

does the end justify the means. been asking ourselves that since way before camelot and does might make right or is might simply right?

i stopped watching the 100 when they all went inside and the original purpose became lost in a desire to get funky. i only made it to S3 of LOST before i simply got tired of all the fluff-drama.

where do we go from here? we have to let it take its course and hopefully people impeach him or vote him out at the next election. we have to unfortunately see first hand what this mindset does long term before we realize the short term gains are simply a myth.

as for the tagline - feel free. i'm sure i read it somewhere also and loved it for much the same reasons as you.
Your post opened my mind even more to the truth with "it's simple - people care more about getting THEIR outcome and "the process" simply gets in the way. but they don't understand the process is what protects us all." Maybe it's the way you worded it, but a light bulb went on directly connecting the good of the whole and the process of how to get there definitely mattering.

As you said, the focus of OUTCOME should be about focusing on what protects all of us. The focus on outcome should be on individuals/groups doing their best, "giving back" to the community, and keeping it clean in how we reach our objectives.

The fact that people place their own individual outcome over the good of the whole is connected to our survival instinct, but as you know our survival needs are nothing like 80,000 years ago (well, minus the human need for water, food, shelter).

For the record, I've placed my own needs over others in the past, and as a slow learner I did it more than once. I learned eventually, that every time I considered only my own gain that whatever followed wasn't going to be good...not for other people, and certainly not for me. We humans on average, tend to be self-centered, but thankfully life experience helps those of us who need to evolve if we're open to finding a better way.

Thank you for your most enlightening reply:)
 
OP
iceberg

iceberg

Platinum Member
Joined
May 15, 2017
Messages
29,894
Reaction score
8,751
Points
490


whoah.
Here is a quote from Newsom that brings to light the most important aspect of this whole thing because it happens to be a factor in almost every single decision humans make, political and otherwise.

Quote regarding Newsom's decision to up CA taxpayers' bills by 30% (according to article) to cover 1 billion dollar mask bill to China: “I’m for OUTCOME here,” Newsom shot back when asked by a reporter about withholding the contract’s details. “Some are CONSUMED BY PROCESS, personality, intrigue. Who’s up, who’s down. We are for actually solving a major, major problem — not only for the state but potentially a template for the country.”

Wow...consumed by process. This guy is a bold one, I'll give him that.

Readers will be right to say that this is a well-known moral dilemma that's been going on for centuries, and that this isn't anything new. It matters more in politics, however, a lot more imo, as these are individuals who are elected to do their best job.

What does it mean to "do the right thing" when the decisions you make are not just your own, or for your family's sake but will impact an entire state? Do you focus strictly on outcome as Newsom and do whatever it takes to do it?

Is Newsom right to say that the means justify the ends? I don't think so, but still admit to having about a 10%-12% doubt.

Maybe the best answer is that it's situational, but that leaves me right where I am with this particular moral dilemma.

I've been considering this complex issue for a few years now, even when watching television shows like The 100 for instance (great show up to the end of season 5, but forget seasons 6 and 7 as they switched writers and upset about half a million fans by the change).

Side note to iceberg: can I borrow that quote you have about the opinion others have about me are not my responsibility? I love that, and fits well with it being no business of mine what others think of me...that one hit hard recently and very helpful for people pleasers like me! Thanks in advance:)
it's simple - people care more about getting THEIR outcome and "the process" simply gets in the way. but they don't understand the process is what protects us all.

without it, they simply make it to where anyone who wants OUTCOME can do it any way they feel necessary to get THEIR desired outcome. we've looked the other way for so long what used to be wrong is at best sighed at today because we know we won't do anything about it.

which makes the entire attitude of I WANT OUTCOME justified in their eyes.

does the end justify the means. been asking ourselves that since way before camelot and does might make right or is might simply right?

i stopped watching the 100 when they all went inside and the original purpose became lost in a desire to get funky. i only made it to S3 of LOST before i simply got tired of all the fluff-drama.

where do we go from here? we have to let it take its course and hopefully people impeach him or vote him out at the next election. we have to unfortunately see first hand what this mindset does long term before we realize the short term gains are simply a myth.

as for the tagline - feel free. i'm sure i read it somewhere also and loved it for much the same reasons as you.
Your post opened my mind even more to the truth with "it's simple - people care more about getting THEIR outcome and "the process" simply gets in the way. but they don't understand the process is what protects us all." Maybe it's the way you worded it, but a light bulb went on directly connecting the good of the whole and the process of how to get there definitely mattering.

As you said, the focus of OUTCOME should be about focusing on what protects all of us. The focus on outcome should be on individuals/groups doing their best, "giving back" to the community, and keeping it clean in how we reach our objectives.

The fact that people place their own individual outcome over the good of the whole is connected to our survival instinct, but as you know our survival needs are nothing like 80,000 years ago (well, minus the human need for water, food, shelter).

For the record, I've placed my own needs over others in the past, and as a slow learner I did it more than once. I learned eventually, that every time I considered only my own gain that whatever followed wasn't going to be good...not for other people, and certainly not for me. We humans on average, tend to be self-centered, but thankfully life experience helps those of us who need to evolve if we're open to finding a better way.

Thank you for your most enlightening reply:)
we all have. normally it's simply called growing up. but to me the left is tearing up the foundation that gives them the right to tear it up in the first place.

nothing good will come of that.

we all either agree to and play by the rules or the rules are meaningless. but you can't pick and choose which rules to do away with, you just validate doing it to begin with. people will eventually pick their own rules to ignore that suits their purpose.

we don't have the rights we have in this. country because we are born into them. we have them because we've defined them and protected them for 250 years.

People want THEIR OUTCOME so bad they don't understand the cost, just blinded to the cause.
 

Toro

Diamond Member
Joined
Sep 29, 2005
Messages
85,503
Reaction score
23,391
Points
2,180
Location
Surfing the Oceans of Liquidity
we all have. normally it's simply called growing up. but to me the left is tearing up the foundation that gives them the right to tear it up in the first place.

nothing good will come of that.

we all either agree to and play by the rules or the rules are meaningless. but you can't pick and choose which rules to do away with, you just validate doing it to begin with. people will eventually pick their own rules to ignore that suits their purpose.

we don't have the rights we have in this. country because we are born into them. we have them because we've defined them and protected them for 250 years.

People want THEIR OUTCOME so bad they don't understand the cost, just blinded to the cause.
When you stop posting unadulterated lying bullshit as you did in the OP, then perhaps you'll have some moral standing to lecture others about how to act in a civil society.
 
OP
iceberg

iceberg

Platinum Member
Joined
May 15, 2017
Messages
29,894
Reaction score
8,751
Points
490
it's simple
It's simple.

Members of the Trump cult are gullible and believe bizarre conspiracy theories propagated by web sites that want to drive traffic and sell you supplements.

So we get you posting bullshit in the OP.
RUSSIA
KAVANAUGH
IMPEACH

you funny.
 

MeBelle

MeBelle 4 Prez 2020
Staff member
Moderator
Joined
Jul 16, 2011
Messages
19,285
Reaction score
8,584
Points
930
When you stop posting unadulterated lying bullshit as you did in the OP, then perhaps you'll have some moral standing to lecture others about how to act in a civil society.
Toro - do you live in California?

No, you don't.

Do you find it interesting that Newsom contracted with China to make more masks for Californians?
China? Really? What's wrong with contracting with American companies?

Then Newsom justifies a 30% increase in state taxes to pay for said masks -- while knowing that all expenses that are Covid incurred will be paid for by the Fed Gov.


This is the same kind of game that California plays when we have forest fires. First they scream for Emergency funds from the Feds.
When asked for an accounting of those monies they flip the Feds the bird.
Then the state goes after PG&E , low hanging fruit - deep pockets - and sues them claiming they started or were complicit in the fires, which may be true or not, yet the State won't allow for controlled burns or brush cutting.
 

Toro

Diamond Member
Joined
Sep 29, 2005
Messages
85,503
Reaction score
23,391
Points
2,180
Location
Surfing the Oceans of Liquidity
When you stop posting unadulterated lying bullshit as you did in the OP, then perhaps you'll have some moral standing to lecture others about how to act in a civil society.
Toro - do you live in California?

No, you don't.

Do you find it interesting that Newsom contracted with China to make more masks for Californians?
China? Really? What's wrong with contracting with American companies?

Then Newsom justifies a 30% increase in state taxes to pay for said masks -- while knowing that all expenses that are Covid incurred will be paid for by the Fed Gov.


This is the same kind of game that California plays when we have forest fires. First they scream for Emergency funds from the Feds.
When asked for an accounting of those monies they flip the Feds the bird.
Then the state goes after PG&E , low hanging fruit - deep pockets - and sues them claiming they started or were complicit in the fires, which may be true or not, yet the State won't allow for controlled burns or brush cutting.
I'm not saying they didn't buy masks from China.

The bullshit part is that it's a kickback scheme.

Prove it or STFU.
 

New Topics

Most reactions - Past 7 days

Forum List

Top