Letters

Letters may be edited for clarity and length. E-mail to letters@ocweekly.com, fax to (714) 708-8410 or send to Letters to the Editor, c/oOC Weekly, P.O. Box 10788, Costa Mesa, CA 92627-0247.

PIMPING TOM

I had a very scary dream last night. I dreamed that I picked up a copy of OC Weekly, something I rarely do, and a brilliant writer by the name of R. Scott Moxley had crafted a remarkable piece explaining why Tom McClintock should be our next governor ["The Progressive Case for Governor McClintock," Oct. 3]. I was so excited! Finally: the Weekly had come to its senses! I agree that McClintock would bring some balance to the liberal, hippie freaks currently running the show in Sacramento, and I had a new paper to read every week that shared my conservative views! Then I dreamed I was taking a shower with Commie Girl. Please don't wake me up.

I enjoyed reading Moxley's article and am likewise refreshed by the approbation of a man's principles and values. While I firmly believe that men can change (read: maturation and growth) and that their past should not forever be the albatross 'round their necks, I do agree that McClintock is the best choice for his sound fiscal judgment and proven leadership. But make no mistake about it: his "ancillary" social views of pro-home-protection, pro-family, anti-abortion, etc. would not be inconsequential once elected.

Impressive.

So Moxley thinks we should all vote for Tom McClintock because McClintock has principles? His principles include intolerance of almost anyone not white or straight. Moxley tells us not to worry because McClintock won't be able to enact his narrow-minded social views. Yeah, of course, he'd only be the governor of the state. Yeah, he'd be practically powerless.

I am a 67-year-old who has voted as a Democrat most of my adult life. However, in this election, I, too, am voting for the man most say SHOULD be governor, state Senator Tom McClintock. I wish people would vote their conscience and forget about which party and how much money the candidate has been able to receive from special-interest groups.

Instead of suggesting progressives vote for a Republican, how about suggesting they vote for the ACTUAL progressive in the race, Peter Camejo? Even your old buddy McClintock has been telling people to "vote your conscience." In your coverage of this "historic" and "unprecedented" election, I've noticed an absence of Camejo—relative to others—in your rag, even though he has shown a passion for the progressive agenda in the numerous debates he has participated in. This is probably the most airtime a Green has gotten to date, and it could prove a turning point, at least a step up, for progressive politics. So, how about throwing some support the direction of the candidate representing the viewpoint of many of your progressive readers?

On a wholly unrelated note, doesn't Cruz Bustamante sound like the narrator of a '70s sex-ed film?

Pretty weak, dude.

Every point you made hit the target, and I say that as a right-wing Libertarian whose views are likely 150 degrees opposite yours. I'm just glad I don't live in your miserable state because you're going to be raped (only figuratively—despite the news) with Schwarzenegger in office. What THEY (whoever they are) fear most is an honest man who fights on principle. I'll take a Goldwater or a Wellstone over a Bush or a Gore any day.

I'd vote for McClintock if I were old enough, but sadly, the California constitution is pretty specific as to when recall elections have to be held. My birthday is Nov. 29. I wouldn't support him on the social issues, but like you said, they wouldn't be enacted, and the real problems the state faces would have a good chance of being ironed out.

Read your recent article on McClintock, and I am stupefied how people cannot see he's a win-win for everyone—especially my pocketbook.

I'm curious about one of Moxley's comments on Schwarzenegger: What exactly is your problem with his practice of group sex? Do you believe that group sex is always unethical or immoral, even when every party is consenting? If so, why? Do I need to point out that many women are into group sex, including notable writers and academics such as Dr. Catherine Millet? And myself for that matter. I'd like to understand why, as a progressive, you are opposed to sexual freedom in this area. By the way, I don't support Schwarzenegger; I just tire of the puritanical attacks no matter what party they emanate from.