Did you see the Cal. gubernatoral debate last night?

Agreed, except for his stand on Prop. 54. For medical reasons it is still necessary to catalogue by race/ethnicity. Not for 'equality' purposes as touted by Bust-the-bankee (Bustamonte), but because there are illnesses and disabilities which are more pronounced in some groups than in others, and if we are to find cures, limiting our knowlege is not a good thing.

McClintock is a good man, and he certainly has my vote.

The exchanges were quite enlightening last night. Huffington spent a good deal of her time demonstrating why a woman might not be a good idea in a governorship here. Bust-the-bankee toed the Democratic line down the line, the Green party candidate is still essentially a socialist, and Arnold was, as Huffington put it, "all over the map." He also didn't know when to shut up, but tried for as much air time as possible, as did Huffington.

McClintock was calm, courteous, and usually right. He is also honest.

Which is why he probably won't make it. He has my vote anyway.

 

I thought that Arnold did okay. Overall, I think that McClintock did the best. It's too bad he can't win and if he stays in the race may enable Bustamante to defeat Arnold so that California ends up with an even more liberal governor than it already has.

 

What else would the state [snip] want?

[ September 29, 2003, 06:40 PM: Message edited by: Dr. Bob Griffin ]

 

McLintock isn't even in my top dozen.

 

J.M. that statement is just patently untrue.

McLintock isn't the only pro life candidate by any stretch of the imagination. He's not the only candidate that is for tax reform or against same sex marriage either.

I won't fault you for making another erroneous statement about California based on your limited access to all the facts. But take it from a person who's read all the candidate statements...your statement just isn't true.