Los Angeles Times election endorsements -

[pinto]

http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/

Times endorsements

Governor: Jerry Brown

Lt. governor: Gavin Newsom
Attorney general: Steve Cooley
Insurance commissioner: Dave Jones
Controller: John Chiang
Treasurer: Bill Lockyer
State superintendent of public instruction: Larry Aceves

U.S. Senate: Barbara Boxer

Proposition 19: No
Proposition 20: Yes
Proposition 21: No
Proposition 22: No
Proposition 23: No
Proposition 24: No
Proposition 25: Yes
Proposition 26: No
Proposition 27: No

California Supreme Court: Tani Cantil-Sakauye, Ming W. Chin and Carlos R. Moreno

2nd District Court of Appeal: Yes on all incumbents

L.A. County Superior Court: Randy Hammock and Alan Schneider

(Times comments on their endorsements are linked at the website ~ pinto)

http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/

[GodlessBiker]

1. Cool, but wrong on Prop 19.

[cbayer]

2. No on 19? That's surprising.

:hi:

[tomm2thumbs]

3. after what is going on to newspaper writers in Mexico, you'd think they'd be for prop19

maybe the ink fumes are getting them higher than anything else could

[K8-EEE]

4. Shocked about 19!!

WTF!! As far as I'm concerned we cannot afford the expensive practice of marijuana prohibition any longer...

[Just One Woman]

5. Drug free Workplace Program

They probably have a drug free workplace program and cannot support it without losing credits on their insurance. Just a thought.

[Stargleamer]

6. re Supreme Court

I voted against Cantil-Sakauye (Republican) and Chen (voted against legalizing gay marriage in Calif.) but for Moreno (voted for legalizing gay marriage in Calif.).

[Iwillnevergiveup]

7. You voted exactly the way I did on these judges

It's shameful that we really have to hunt for background info on these nominees.

[Misskittycat]

9. Can we discuss this a bit more, please.

I'm a Dem precinct captain in San Diego County, and I prepare a "sample ballot" that mirrors the local ballot that precinct voters will actually see. I like to encourage the Dems to vote in every contest, including the purportedly local, "nonpartisan" races. So I've done some background research, including on the Supreme Court justices.

My question is: should Dems routinely vote not to confirm the already-appointed Supreme and appellate court justices who are Republican? Is that just too partisan? Any thoughts?

[Stargleamer]

11. In my opinion, no it doesn't make it too partisan

Any Supreme Court justice nowadays who identifies as Republican is either an extremist or has no problem in going along with extremists. Let's face it, there are no Eisenhower Republicans left anymore--they've all pretty much gone over to the dark side. So the Chief Justice isn't likely to side with the impoverished but with those who want to promote inequality, a compelling reason to vote against her in my book.

As for Chin, well, he could have ruled for equality in In re Marriage Cases, but didn't--so I vote against him too.

[krabigirl]

8. Meh..no on 19? No thanks.

[Uncle Joe]

10. Pass 19 and then work out the jurisdictional details. This is coming from the ground up, not

the state down.

Thanks for the thread, pinto.