Jessie Said:

California Democrats sent FRAUDULENT VOTERS GUIDE MAILER... Did you get one ?

We Answered:

You aligned yourself with moveon.org? Wow, that's...........pathetic.

Carrie Said:

Looking for a fiscally conservative voter guide for California?

We Answered:

I wouldn't call that conservative. Gavin Newsom c'mon

Lauren Said:

Who put out the "Voter Information Guide for Democrats"? It was mailed to all dems in California?

We Answered:

"Voter Information Guide for Democrats" is an obviously deceptive piece of political ad put out by Larry Levine & Associates. Here is the address of the organization behind the ad (see the last URL in the Source(s) list):

Larry Levine & Associates
13701 Riverside Drive, Suite 604
Sherman Oaks, CA 91316

Phone: (818) 906-8747
Fax: (818) 906-8079

E-mail: larrylevine@earthlink.net

A good description of this ad is provided in the following articles: "Feinstein says campaign mailer misleads voters" and
"For-profit 'voters guides' called misleading" (see sources). You can find more info if you search Google for "Voter Information Guide for Democrats" (include quotes in the search string).

Chester Said:

Calling linguists and scholars -- do I detect biased wording on my ballot?

We Answered:

Great question, well put. First, a linguist responds:

I noticed the same thing on the description to Prop 8. The indicative verb “Eliminates” really jumps out at you. It is indeed at odds, syntactically, with all of the other intro’s which are basically of the form “Measure that would ___ [verb].” So, I agree, the wording is unusually blunt and descriptive; that said, is it biased? Maybe, but in which direction? I think it would depend on the predisposition of the voter. I don’t agree necessarily that “no American wants to eliminate rights.” Sure they do: the supporters of Prop 8 are trying to eliminate the right of same-sex couples to marry -- that is precisely what they want to do, and they are not shy about saying so. If they felt the wording were biased against their position, we surely would have heard from them... don’t know, but it is possible they even signed off on this wording.

Now a scholar responds: I won’t waste your time reviewing all the pro’s and cons on this one: you’ve not only heard them all, you are obviously a thoughtful person and are fully aware of them. Let me offer a view you may not have thought of or heard yet. A constitution should be a high-level document that is treated with great respect by its citizens. It should empower and uplift, not demean or restrict. It should not be cluttered up with details and conditions. I have seen lesser constitutions in 3rd-world countries that were so full of special rights, restrictions, tax rates, labor laws, etc, that they were constantly being tinkered with; as a result, the citizens of those countries treat their constitution not as a sacred document, but just another set of laws that will change as the political winds change. Ask Brasileiros or Peruanos about their constitution and they will respond with something like “Which one,?" or, "Oh, what have they done with it now?”

The US Constitution, on the other hand, is held in reverential esteem by most of us because, for one thing, it is an empowering document that is not constantly being altered. The worst thing ever to happen to it was the 18th Amendment, which was petty and stupid and had to be followed by another amendment canceling it. What really happened? A well-meaning group tried to use the Constitution to legislate. Wrong, wrong, wrong. Never mind they were trying to legislate morality, always a mistake anyway -- they should not have to tried to use this noble document to legislate in the first place.

Prop 8 is the same thing. If it does not fail, it will be reversed in the future, and our great, ennobling California Constitution will be diminished by the process. On these grounds alone I would urge a vote of NO on 8.

If I may add a personal note, I feel that those people who make insincere wedding vows, or who make them sincerely and then fail to live up to them, do by far the most damage to the institution of marriage. When I hear a serial adulterer with kids and divorces and ex-spouses all over the place claiming we need to defeat 8 to save the sacred institution of marriage, I think H-Y-P-O-C-R-I-T-E!!!

And, finally, I would also repeat an oft-heard argument: If two human beings love each other and want to take care of each other until the end of their lives, can you suggest even ONE humane reason why they should not be fully entitled to that right? Please don’t make my beloved Constitution into a petty and mean-spirited document.

Jessie Said:

Why Does My Union Voter Guide Profile Only Two Candidates For Governor?

We Answered:

The nuisance candidates were eliminated but they must be included in the guide so that people will have more choices.