Maybe at least a pretense of impartiality

In today's Sacramento Bee, an editorial on the recently-passed state budget, at the end of which the (anonymous) author writes:

So last Saturday the Assembly ended up, as is so often the case with the two-thirds rule, passing a lowest common dominator budget, one that neither cuts spending nor raises taxes. It pretends to cut spending and pretends to raise revenue, but in fact it pushes off the crisis into next year, when the state is likely to face another shortfall of at least $15 billion.

That's a far worse result than Davis' budget proposal in May or than the budget approved by the state Senate in late June. Indeed, it's not much better than having no budget at all. But as long as California keeps the two-thirds rule, and as long as legislative Republicans regard ideological purity on taxes as more important than governing, the state can't expect much better.

So, all right, it's not a great budget. It's plain as day that the Bee is supporting their candidate for gov, namely Guv Grayout, master of the power crisis ("Honey, where'd the lights go?"); never mind that part of his "small" tax increases would have raised my automobile registration fees to nose-bleed levels...and that on my motorcycle.

But nice shot at the Republicans who stood at least attempted to stand on principle, versus The Other Side that stood by more and more spending, and "Let's buy that damn electorate!"

My state is in a handbasket, headed for a warm place.

PS - What in the hell is a "lowest common dominator budget"? I don't remember that term in public admin class.