response 216 of 264:

Sep 9 17:02 UTC 2003

Good one!  :-)

response 218 of 264:

Sep 11 02:15 UTC 2003

I got my sample ballot in the mail today.

Listed right above Cruz Bustamonte, the Democratic Leutenant Governor, is
"John Christopher Burton, Civil Rights Lawyer."  A different John Burton is
a powerful and well known state senator.  Other famous names on the ballot
include Edward Kennedy, a "businessman/educator;" Robert Dole, a "small
business owner;" and Michael Jackson, a "satellite project manager."  An
engineer named S. Issa is also listed.  Darrel Issa was the guy who organized
the recall but dropped out of the replacement race.  Also on the similar but
not matching a famous name list are Dan Feinstein and Diana Foss, the only
two candidates who don't list occupations.  Porn star Mary Carey is listed
as "Mary 'Mary Carey' Cook."  Since all the candidates with names beginning
with C are grouped together, and aren't in alphabetical order, that may not
actually make it hard for her supporters (if she has any) to find her.

Much press attention a month ago, and a few of the lawsuits trying to delay
the recall, were centered around the consolodation of polling places  to save
preparation time.  Indeed, while my usual polling place is a local elementary
school, my polling place for the recall is listed as the garage of 1515
Francisco Street.

response 220 of 264:

Sep 11 14:00 UTC 2003

Gray Davis is a lousy governor.  I'm just not sure any of the
alternatives are less lousy.

I heard on the radio yesterday that some Michigan legislators are
suggesting amending the recall rules to only allow recall elections as
part of a regularly scheduled election.  This seems to be a move to
prevent frivilous recalls from costing the state money.

response 222 of 264:

Sep 11 16:44 UTC 2003

re:  "#220 (gull): . . .I heard on the radio yesterday that some 
Michigan legislators are suggesting amending the recall rules to only 
allow recall elections as part of a regularly scheduled election.  This 
seems to be a move to prevent frivilous recalls from costing the state 
money."

If you are implying that the CA recall vote is not being conducted in 
conjunction with a previously scheduled election, then we believe you 
are incorrect.

response 224 of 264:

Sep 11 18:19 UTC 2003

i believe that the whole recall effort is a rich republican
GAME.

response 226 of 264:

Sep 11 20:11 UTC 2003

re 222:
        The California recall vote is indeed a special election created just
for the recall.  There are a couple of other ballot proposals on the ballot,
but they would have waited until later were it not for the recall election.

response 228 of 264:

Sep 15 17:38 UTC 2003

From: <BreakingNews@MAIL.CNN.COM>
Date:         Mon, 15 Sep 2003 13:20:05 -0400
Subject:      CNN Breaking News

-- Federal appeals court delays California gubernatorial recall election.

response 230 of 264:

Sep 15 17:40 UTC 2003

That would only apply to North Carolina.  ;-)

response 232 of 264:

Sep 15 17:57 UTC 2003

I thought Georgia was heavy in goobers.

response 234 of 264:

Sep 16 02:53 UTC 2003

Might anyone know the amount of time that would elapse between the 
certification of the CA election results & the assumption of power by 
the newly elected governor - assuming Davis were to be recalled?

response 236 of 264:

Sep 16 15:44 UTC 2003

It would have to wait for the results to be certified, probably by a board
of canvassers.  We can expect the necessary people to be present at that
meeting.

response 238 of 264:

Sep 18 16:17 UTC 2003

Not so fast, please, Mr. gull:

Thanks to Best of the Web, Opinionjournal.com:

Disunity on the Angry Left
By ordering the cancellation of next month's California election, the 
Ninth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals has gone too far even for some 
members of the Angry Left. Bruce Ackerman of Yale Law School has an op-
ed in today's New York Times that distinguishes the case from Bush v. 
Gore, which the Ninth Circuiters mischievously cited as their chief 
precedent. 

"The present decision attacks states' rights at their very core," 
Ackerman writes. "The short election period is central to California's 
political integrity. Its constitution places a limit of six months on 
this extraordinary process. By extending the election beyond this 
period, the court condemns the state to an extended period of political 
paralysis." Ackerman even argues that the ruling is an infringement on 
political speech:

[It] disrupts the core First Amendment freedom to present a coherent 
political message to voters. Worse yet, the decision disrupts the First 
Amendment interests of the millions of Californians who have 
participated in the recall effort. State law promised them a quick 
election if they completed their petitions by an August deadline. Now 
their effort will have to compete in March with the candidates for the 
Democratic presidential nomination. A campaign focused on California 
issues may be swamped by national politics.

What makes this extraordinary is that Ackerman is one of academia's 
shrillest critics of Bush v. Gore; as we noted in April 2001, he went 
so far as to liken that ruling to the assassination of Abraham Lincoln. 
His willingness to rise above partisanship stands in stark contrast 
with the New York Times editorial page . . . .