[Reagan Man]

>>>I not only read the article, but the law regarding it, which from you obviously had not from your abrupt change from the 1st amendment defence to equal protection.

I haven't changed my tune. The way I read it, it's an infringement on McClintock's first amendment right of free speech and his right to equal treatment under law.

I can't think of a good reason why any conservative would deny another conservative his rights under law and condone the outrageous behavior of California's liberal Democratic majority.

[RS]

"I can't think of a good reason why any conservative would deny another conservative his rights under law and condone the outrageous behavior of California's liberal Democratic majority."

Just because you "can't think of a good reason" dosen't mean that there is not one that you don't WANT to see.

Both the Republicans and the Democrats in this race realize that to give one candidate a special priviledge based on stupidity is against the law, common sense, and would set a precedent that none of them wants.

Do you seriously want to use as a basis of argument what McClintock's INTENT was as he submitted his paperwork rather then what he marked ?
( thank God the applications are not in punch card format )