Replies

For many Republicans the choice seems easy enough. “Anything is better than Davis, Schwarzenegger has a good chance, vote for him.” First of all, it is unwise to suggest that “anything is better than Davis” because to do so means that one would literally elect anyone to replace him. For anyone who cannot see the danger in such a proposition, try the following: “Anyone is better than Ted Bundy as a date for my daughter”, only to have “anyone” wind up being Charles Manson. It is true that some people are far more qualified than Davis, but not everyone, and to be sure, not even most. Without digging too deep, does anyone really think that Gary Coleman should be “anyone”? Second, I agree that Schwarzenegger has a good chance of winning, though I am not sure anyone can really tell me how this came to be the case.

Republicans really need to consider the ramifications of being awe-struck by a man who has never held a position in the P.T.A., let alone one that requires running a state while ignoring, because he is probably a ‘long shot’, a man like Tom McClintock. McClintock does not have the name recognition in Hollywood, or the money that comes with such, but last I checked, Sacramento was not suffering from a lack of performing arts, but instead, a government that is spending far more money than it takes in. Unreal to me is that in the current state of affairs; qualifications seem to be finding their way to the back burner, while popularity has taken center stage, literally. Californians have a choice.

(Ecerpt from "Not Good Enough" written by Andrew Bales posted at www.yrfkc.org)