[goldstategop]

Yes, the Los Angeles Times is right for once and even a broken clock is right twice a day. Arnold had a chance to staunch the flow of red ink bequeathed by his predecessor. He blew it. I'm advising California Republicans in our State Legislature to vote NO on this budget. I'd rather see the state head into financial receivership that see us continue to spend money we don't have.

[pogo101]

Well, the reason the LA Times did its puff piece on McClintock, when it did so, IMO was to try to dilute the Arnold vote, which it most feared.

Had Tom been the front-runner, or running 2d with over 20%, do you really think the LA Times still would have covered him as favorably? That it would NOT have run extensive slam pieces on how his cuts would hurt "the children," "the environment," selling off parks, etc.? IMO, clearly it would have crucified Tom in that situation.

I'll betcha the LA Times endorsed Tom's last general election opponent, Daniel Gonzalez. Couldn't verify that online.