Yes, posing this--only partly serious--question got me in "trouble" the last time. But how can one avoid the question, when these stories keep coming out.
The Los Angeles Times--an unreliable mainstream media source that inexplicably has done some real journalism--previously reported that California welfare recipients were using their debit cards to obtain money at CASINOS. Now the Los Angeles Times has revisited the high living welfare recipients of California, and found that 12 million dollars of taxpayer money was distributed--through those same welfare debit cards--in LAS VEGAS (as well as on cruise ships out of Miami). And the Los Angeles Times reports that state "investigators" did not even INQUIRE about questionable expenditures in luxury vacation spots out of state.
You know that California is in about the worst shape of any state in the country--a dysfunctional, bankrupt state--and yet the same people keep getting elected. Jerry Brown was "Governor Moonbeam" back when I was a young lawyer--30 years or more ago. California voters may elect him again, along with many of the same people who have put California in this shape. That is the problem with electing "moderate" Republicans. They are indistinguishable from leftist Democrats, and yet the Republican Party gets blamed for what they do. Yep. I am talking about Governor Arnold, who is somewhere to the left of President Obama. I have people on Newsvine still tell me that Governor Arnold is a Republican. If you actually say that with a straight face, you are unqualified to comment on politics. Jerry Bron will be indistinguishable from The Terminator (lol as to this description for a girly man). No, I am not sure Meg Whitman will be much better (another one of those "moderate" Republicans--which has not save her, as it did not save John McCain, from being unfairly SMEARED in a negative ad campaign led by the mainstream media). And California may be beyond saving anyway, as the stories on welfare indicate. Maybe it would be better (for the rest of us) to just let leftists have California (or "kal-ee-for-nia") to destroy to the very end, as an object lesson to the rest of us. If only California would stop sending politicians to Washington (Nancy Pelosi and Barbara Boxer, for example) who are trying to export the "benefits" of California-style government to us all.
You can see where I got in trouble last time. I recalled the "Get Smart" episode where Maxwell Smart questioned whether his agency should stop California from being blown up--making a rather subtle joke about Ronald Reagan and his acting. Ronald Reagan was then governor of California--the last really good governor that California had, as well as the last really good President of the United States.
There was no controversy, as I remember it, about the "Get Smart" episode at the time. But when I reasonably updated the question Newsvine suspended me for a week. I am still not sure exactly why, although I was referred to that article. If it was acceptable satire in the 1950s world of TV, I don't see why it is not acceptable satire now.
In any event, I again repeat the question: Is California worth saving? No. I don't know the answer. But the question seems perfectly reasonable. Now what would make it unreasonable would be to EVACUATE California, so that the people move in with the rest of us. That would be true disaster, and maybe California is worth saving as a place for the crazies to live--if only we could keep them from bothering the rest of us.
I am aware that there are SOME people in California worth saving--another good reason not to let California be blown up, if some evil organization is planning to do that. I have mentioned my Sodom and Gomorrah search for an honest, competent Associated Press writer. I have yet to find one, and that really applies to the entire mainstream media (excluding, MAYBE, the Los Angeles Times reporter referenced above). But California definitely is not as bad as the mainstream media. There is no question there are SOME worthy people trapped there.
Thus, it remains a thorny question. What is to be done about California? The best thing to do is probably to simply refuse to bail out the state any further, and otherwise leave the state to sink or swim (again, on the theory that "sinking" will be an object lesson for the rest of the country