Governor Schwarzenegger's outgoing chief of staff, Patricia Clarey, sent this farewell e-mail today:
From: Pat Clarey
Sent: Wednesday, November 30, 2005 9:01 AM
To: All Governor's Staff
Subject: Thank you to all
Today I am announcing that I am stepping down on January 1 as Chief of Staff to the Governor. This has been a decision that has been a long time coming.
Earlier this year I discussed with the Governor my desire to leave at the end of this year and the time has come. I want to personally thank each and every one of you for your hard work and dedication to this Governor. I am gratified at the success that we have realized as a team.
The most important ingredient to the achievement of the Governor's successes is assembling a talented and dedicated staff. I could not be more proud of the caliber of your work and dedication. You serve the Governor well every day and I appreciate the tremendous amount of support that you have all shown to me along the way.
I would also like to welcome Susan Kennedy as the new Chief of Staff.
Susan's appointment will be announced later today. I have known and worked with Susan for many years and have a great deal of admiration for her commitment to public service. She knows and understands California's issues and challenges and will be able to step in and continue to lead the staff to support the vision that the Governor has for a better California. I look forward to transitioning with Susan during the month of December and am confident that it will be a seamless transition.
Susan will be regularly in the horseshoe starting today. I encourage you to introduce yourself and welcome her.
Again, I thank you all for your support.
Vaya con Dios, Pat. I wouldn't want to serve on the S.S. Schwarzenegger either, now that Captain Arnold has disabled the starboard rudder.
""Susan will be regularly in the horseshoe starting today. I encourage you to introduce yourself and welcome her"""
That way if she notices that you are a Republican she can fire you today.
Posted by: Phil Paule | November 30, 2005 at 12:00 PM
I wonder how John Campbell feels about having Arnold's endorsement right now? Gilliard is probably on the phone to his printer and webmaster right now telling them to remove all traces of Arnold Schwarzenneger's name from Campbell stationary. That's the thing about RINOs, you just can't trust em with any power.
Powder Blue Report
Posted by: Allan Bartlett | November 30, 2005 at 12:04 PM
Projecting much, Phil? You guys are the ones who are all het up about ANY bow to bipartisanship. You want one party rule, but you don't have a majority here. Frankly, I'm pretty sure the Kennedy move is just lip-service to being more open-minded to the wishes of hte majority of the state; how often do you think Kennedy will do anything besides EXACTLY what Schwarz. wants her to do? But it's nice to at least get lip service instead of your sides' constant demands to move MORE right, on which, I'll remind you, the majority disagrees.
California: love it or leave it.
How've you been, anyway? I ain't seen you forever!
Becca
Posted by: rebecca | November 30, 2005 at 12:26 PM
Rebecca, why don't the on this site provide their complete names?
I seem to remember that Arnold, just as Bush, won a MAJORITY of the vote. So the MAJORITY of the state, in a high turnout special election, voted him in. Allan's "don't trust RINOs" comment is correct. They can't be trusted, especially if they sleep with a member of the "tax everyone else and let me hide my assets in my trusts" Kennedy Clan.
The only way Arnie could have won, by your logic, is that he stole the election. If you're one of the moonbats and want to say that, why don't you look in the mirror with what happened in the State of Washington's gubernatorial race. More votes for the Dem than registered voters in one county and other shinanigans in others. And then there are the dead people in Chicago who elected Kennedy.
Look, many of us voted for Arnie because the state was (and still is) in a mess and, while we preferred McClintock, held our nose for a 'viable' alternative. I'm now of the opinion we should have let Bustamente win. Then we'd be in even worse shape and California would truly be willing to change its ways.
We all have a right to have opinions. Calling us names isn't providing an answer, what is your solution to California?
Posted by: Miriam Bertram | November 30, 2005 at 01:19 PM
Rebecca, why don't the on this site provide their complete names?
I seem to remember that Arnold, just as Bush, won a MAJORITY of the vote. So the MAJORITY of the state, in a high turnout special election, voted him in. Allan's "don't trust RINOs" comment is correct. They can't be trusted, especially if they sleep with a member of the "tax everyone else and let me hide my assets in my trusts" Kennedy Clan.
The only way Arnie could have won, by your logic, is that he stole the election. If you're one of the moonbats and want to say that, why don't you look in the mirror with what happened in the State of Washington's gubernatorial race. More votes for the Dem than registered voters in one county and other shinanigans in others. And then there are the dead people in Chicago who elected Kennedy.
Look, many of us voted for Arnie because the state was (and still is) in a mess and, while we preferred McClintock, held our nose for a 'viable' alternative. I'm now of the opinion we should have let Bustamente win. Then we'd be in even worse shape and California would truly be willing to change its ways.
We all have a right to have opinions. Calling us names isn't providing an answer, what is your solution to California?
Posted by: Miriam Bertram | November 30, 2005 at 01:19 PM
We all have a right to have opinions. Calling us names isn't providing an answer, what is your solution to California?
Cut about 60% of the spending in Sacrament, privatize public education, return to a part-time legislature.
And that's just the first day.
Posted by: MrWhipple | November 30, 2005 at 01:27 PM
Miriam, while I do love calling names--seriously, LOVE IT!--I can't see where I called any here.
Um, and I never said Arnie stole the election--NOBODY, even the moonbattiest among us, thinks that (Bush and Ohio are an entirely different matter). What I am saying is that a MAJORITY of CA are Dems. Bowing to that reality and governing as the centrist he portrayed himself to be, instead of as a member of a minority right wing, which you want him to even while saying that the people elected him for a reason, well, the reason was he was famous and exciting and manly . . . and portrayed himself as a moderate.
"Rebecca, why don't the on this site provide their complete names?" I think a word is missing there. If you're asking why the liberals on this site don't use their whole names, well, everybody on this site knows damn well who I am, which is more than you can say of our kind hosts.
Becca
Posted by: rebecca | November 30, 2005 at 01:34 PM
Between Maria and now Susan. Conservatives have no chance of getting any time with Arnie.
Posted by: Blog Watcher | November 30, 2005 at 01:36 PM
Rebecca:
Grrr.
Um, and I never said Arnie stole the election--NOBODY, even the moonbattiest among us, thinks that (Bush and Ohio are an entirely different matter).
I was in Ohio, the only people trying to steal elections there were MoveOn, ACORN, etc. We stopped them. If that meets your definition of Bush stealing Ohio, oh well.
Other than that, how are you doing?
Jeff
Posted by: Jeff Flint | November 30, 2005 at 01:58 PM
I always love the conservative myth that Daley stole Illinois and hence the election for Kennedy. It doesn't take a whole lot of research to find out that even if Illinois went to Nixon. Kennedy is still being sworn in on Inauguration Day. But repeating a good myth to bolster one's misguided notions is a lot more fun.
Posted by: Blog Watcher | November 30, 2005 at 02:09 PM
To Blog Watcher:
RE: "I always love the conservative myth that Daley stole Illinois and hence the election for Kennedy. It doesn't take a whole lot of research to find out that even if Illinois went to Nixon. Kennedy is still being sworn in on Inauguration Day. But repeating a good myth to bolster one's misguided notions is a lot more fun."
It was the Mayor in Chicago and "Landslide" Lyndon's team in Texas that made the difference in 1960...Cuba would be free today had the election not been stolen...
Posted by: Brett R. Barbre | November 30, 2005 at 02:14 PM
Hi Jeff! I'm well, thanks! Say, there's some stupid old comment on myoc (I was ego-surfing) from some seriously disturbed adn one-track Weekly-hater about how once he saw me ask someone at a CRP function/election night to buy me a drink, and that I got all bent out of shape when the nameless person said no. Have you ever heard anything about that?
Becca
Posted by: rebecca | November 30, 2005 at 02:43 PM
Rebecca: "everybody on this site knows damn well who I am"
I don't. Does that make me a nobody ;-)
I converted to being a Republican about 10 years ago, when I realized I should vote for the party that supports my values. Had to be quiet about it since I am a Jew.
I am not a life long activist and don't really know the 'in crowd'; I am a grassroots worker and organizer.
So mind directing me to your website so I can be among those who know?
Posted by: Miriam Bertram | November 30, 2005 at 02:46 PM
It would be news to me. So make sure you come to the next GOP convention, and I will buy you a drink.
Posted by: Jeff Flint | November 30, 2005 at 02:48 PM
Miriam: you can find me at OCweekly.com. Jeff, it's tough for me to go to GOP events these days, as I'm sure you're well aware!
Posted by: rebecca | November 30, 2005 at 02:59 PM
Ms. Bertram-
Rebecca goes by the alias "Commie Girl" on OC Weekly. Her column is quite - how does one say it? - raw for us, square conservatives, but quick witted. I read it from time to time, but wouldn't call it mandatory.
Posted by: Silence Dogood | November 30, 2005 at 03:28 PM
Silenced Dogood, it is actually Miriam Bertram. Ph.D. Micobiology. This is for Rebecca's benefit only, they overly respect degrees, and mine is a real degree. For which I paid by working as a dishwasher, living on peanut butter, and taking loans out. Which I've paid off. I'm not whining, simply further clarifiying my 'conversion' to being a Republican. I chose to vote my values. And I respect individuals for what they do, not what they say.
Posted by: Miriam Bertram | November 30, 2005 at 05:40 PM
Sure Bret. And pigs would've flown. The votes in both states were close so someone cheated. The vote in CA for Nixon was closer than IL or TX. Maybe Nixon cheated there.
Posted by: Blog Watcher | November 30, 2005 at 07:47 PM
I still don't know how Californians would have voted for a suicidal pig from hell, who has sexual harassment charges against him. How could we ever trust his decisions. With his neo Nazi past. Our we completely oblivious to this tyrants mission at the state of California’s tax payers dollars.
Just some food for thought!
Posted by: Dean | June 26, 2008 at 04:02 PM
Maria Shriver is supposed to be a decent prominent woman. But what would a woman like her be doing married to an ex-porn star like Arnold Schwarzenegger? She is kind of making one hell of a statement of the type of whore she truly is.
Don't you think so?
Posted by: Dean | June 26, 2008 at 04:10 PM
God I love the freedom of speech act. Arnold Schwarzenneger and Maria Shriver are a couple of thieves, who need to be caught.
There marriage is not valid. Maria is a husband snatcher. Arnold’s real wife is a Lolita type of figure for him. Maria tried to take advantage of her because she was younger and at the time naive.
God Bless America, because with those two we are going to need it!
Posted by: Dean | June 26, 2008 at 04:37 PM