|The Declarer (Floyd McWilliams' Blog)|
Sunday, September 28, 2003
Today's San Jose Mercury News opinion page masthead editorial opposes the recall. Remember as you read on that there are a whole committee of people paid real money to compose this drivel.
"Davis has championed major increases in education funding." Yes, blockheads, that's why we have a budget deficit. What do these people think their readers have for brains? Oatmeal? "I am voting to recall Davis because the state has a huge deficit." "But Davis championed major increases in education funding." "He greatly increased spending? Well I guess I was wrong about that budget deficit. Thanks for letting me know!"
I'm also glad to see that the Merc editorial board doesn't have to deal with rude concepts like quantities. "All that money was spent fighting crime, which is one of your priorities, so move along." If I hire a servant to do my grocery shopping, and tell him beer is a priority, do I lose my right to complain when he spends my life's savings on a Sierra Nevada bottling facility?
I look forward to next year's Mercury News endorsement of George W. Bush for president. Is it too much to ask that the Merc editorial writers, who exude high-mindedness and deliberation, to refrain from tu quoque?
Californians have had the ability to recall their governor for nearly a century. Every single governor has been the target of a recall petition. Doesn't that suggest that we will not have a recall every year from here on out?
And isn't California a strongly Democratic state? If the recall is a partisan endeavor, how can it be polling 60-65%?
This is my favorite anti-recall argument:
Boy, talk about parochial! Are there any free countries that don't fix the date of their elections, and can oust their leaders at any time? Only every other democracy in the entire world.