[StoneColdGOP]

Great insights from Tom McClintock.

[kellynla]

Thanks for posting...
saves me some time from plowing through 160 pages of verrrry small print! LOL

[backtothestreets]

His opinions count with me.

[madison46]

Except for 70, I'll vote tht way

[telebob]

That's what I've got on my scorecard, too.

[So Cal Rocket]

My take, after reading all 160 pages, plus the supplemental:

Prop 1A: Local Gov't Revenue Protection - YES
Prop 59: Open Meetings - YES
Prop 60: Rights of Political Parties - YES
Prop 60A: Surplus Property - YES
Prop 61: Children's Hospital Bonds - NO
Prop 62: Louisiana Style Primaries - NO
Prop 63: Millionaire Tax - NO
Prop 64: End Shakedown Lawsuits - YES
Prop 65: Local Gov't Revenue Protection - YES
Prop 66: Ease 3 Strikes Law - NO
Prop 67: Phone Tax - NO
Prop 68: 25% tax on Indian Gaming - YES
Prop 69: Collect DNA - NO
Prop 70: Exclusive Indian Gaming - NO
Prop 71: State Funding for Stem Cell Research - NO
Prop 72: Mandated Healthcare Coverage - NO

[markman46]

I voted no on all but 59..

[Right Cal Gal]

Print out and take to polls on election day. His analysis is always thoughtful and well researched.

We lost a lot when the idiotarians in California failed to make this man governor.

[kingu]

69. DNA Samples. YES. Requires DNA samples to be taken from all felons and criminal suspects. It means that violent crimes will become much easier to solve - and with far greater certainty than ever before. It will give "Cold Case Files" lots of new material.

Used to be, I thought that Tom was a conservative. But geeze; wholesale throwing out of a person's right of privacy? No court order, nothing - just have to have a cop suspect you of a crime and your DNA goes into a national database. What's next, having us all line up to give DNA samples to get a driver's license?

[counterpunch]

68. Casino Grande. NO. I don't believe it's any of government's business how grown-ups chose to spend their time and money as long as they're not hurting anyone. But I object to the extortionate provisions of the measure that would force Indian tribes to accept outlandish conditions or face financial ruin.

I do wonder about this one. If Tom said he does support limiting how adults spend their money, or say he thinks gambling is immoral or a tax on the poor or say that expanding gambling beyond tribes would turn California into the new Sodom and Gomorrah, then I could at least accept his position as honest, then judge the merits of it from there.

But Tom makes no case other than saying it "forces outlandish conditions" on tribal casinos (and in the same breath makes a case against his own position with a qualifier). these conditions I believe have to do with them "paying their fair share". There are valid points to make for both sides of this issue, but since Tom was in the Indian Gambling back pocket in his spoiler run against Arnold, I just don't know that he has any credibilty on this issue. He might just be looking for some more payback funding for his 2006 run.

I'd like to see more discussion on this issue without the influence of Indian Gaming money pulling the puppet strings. Anyone have some thoughts on this?

[calcowgirl]

Ping.

McClintock view on the Initiatives

[Rusty0604]

Thanks,this helps a lot

[cmiller623]

Tom McClintock is the best guy out there in State government...he is like Mr. Smith (from the old movie) and would be a great replacement for SenaWhore Boxer. Too bad he isn't running against that witch.

[hedgetrimmer]

Bump

[eureka!]

Thanks for posting. Bump for later print for reference...

[hattend]

They just discussed all the props on Hugh Hewitt. No on everything except 70

[NormsRevenge]

Bump

[tophat9000]

bump for later