The media are sporting their typical coverage of the California recall election, echoing the establishment cries that the election a "circus." The usual election is a two-ring circus, unable to contain over 130 candidates. Reporters handicap those running to make things easier – for them.

Californians can find their way around a couple hundred television channels; undoubtedly they could keep track of far fewer gubernatorial hopefuls. In the official so-called debate the other day, there were five participants, based on their standing in the polls. Unless the next governor will be chosen by a poll, who gives a rat's ass!? At least there was a greater spectrum of views than normal. From the party-line Democrat to the unbalanced Green, the anti-freedom conservative, the free-thinking journalist and whatever the hell Arnold is supposed to be.

A lot of information was tossed about, as it has been since this battle started. Too bad most of it was pure bullshit that could have been sorted out by a real debate.

An example of the deception is a recent anti-recall commercial featuring Dianne Feinstein urging us to let "this governor" do his job. Never mentioning his name, she claims that the recall effort, which started not long after the election, is disruptive and, even worse, insults the 8 million Californians who voted last November. I voted in that election and I love this recall.

Even though we should take Dianne at her word, the Secretary of State's web site reveals that only 7,736,500 persons voted in the election. That's about as close to the truth as one should expect from one of the state's leading fascists. It gets better. Of those who voted, 3,533,490 chose Davis, a sweeping 45.67%. Add the 3,169,801 Simon voters with those who voted for other candidates and it turns out 3,940,540 (50.09% or "over half," as Feinstein would put it using political license) voted for someone other than Davis. Add in those voters who couldn't bring themselves to vote for anyone running and you get 4,203,010 (54.32%), well over half.

To claim that the 2002 election was an endorsement of Davis by 8 million Californians is, as I suggested, 100% bullshit. Had she said over 3.5 million Californians (out of about 34 million – 10.24%) reelected Davis, her rhetoric would have looked as shabby a homeless dweller in her home town. And with the old voting procedures in effect, who knows how many votes were not counted.

Summing up: she can't stomach the governor enough to mention his name and she distorts the election results. Nothing new there. Feinstein used similar deception to beat a recall attempt when she had the distinction of being San Francisco's worst mayor in recent times.

The reason most politicians, even those who support this recall, do not endorse recalls "in principle" is that they hate any process that makes them accountable. If a politician can trick a plurality of voters into electing him (or her), it should end there. Sure they couch their arguments in clever terms. "How can elected officials make bold decisions if they are going to be second-guessed by their constituents?" Here's my argument. "How can voters believe any campaign promise from unaccountable individuals?" There is another election down the road, but why should the population suffer? Politicians can change their minds after an election, so voters should have the same prerogative.

They say the process is disruptive. So what? Maybe California should have a law that any new employee cannot be fired for four years from the hire date. If I do not have that job security, Gray Davis shouldn't either.

They say a special election is expensive. That's a non-issue. The election is happening, so we may as well get our money's worth. If it is an issue, the question to ask is why it's so expensive. We've got Registrars in every county, with staffs. How do they keep busy between elections – running Bingo?

Finally, there's the equally bogus argument that this is a Republican plot to reverse the outcome of last year's election. A Republican was behind the ballot effort, but the Republican Party opposed it, reasoning that an inept Democratic governor of California might boost their showing in the next national election. In fact, the first party to endorse the recall was the Libertarian Party. I am not a Republican and I thought there should be a recall before it was initiated. I was looking for a petition to sign, but all I could find were petitions to stop the recall, which struck me as perverse.

The question is not the expense, the disruption or who supports it. The question is, "Do you believe Gray Davis is doing a satisfactory job or, at least, a better job than any of the 130 or so others could do?" It's a no-brainer. And that's why I voted YES – recall Davis.

I did not vote for Ahnuld. Bustamonte says (in his ad) that Arnold is not one of "us," as if a Sacramento politician like Cruz is one of us. I've never heard of a state official quitting because he wasn't making enough money to continue "serving" the people. If you want someone who understands what regular Californians experience, do not vote for any of the rich alternatives. There are regular persons on the ballot.

Garson Keillor recently wrote: "Most men and women in politics are there because they genuinely like people and want to do good things on their behalf." Presumably, he was being sarcastic. It's no accident that most politicians are lawyers. Frank Zappa wrote a song mentioning that politicians look out for number one, and we're not even number 3.

In the years I've lived in Pacifica, nearly every day, sometimes more than once, I take US1 to 280. From day one there were two unavoidable large bumps on the on-ramp. They're not speed bumps, they're bulges needing repair. With all the taxes and fees we pay, those have never been touched. If any politicians wanted to help us, they'd fix it, so our cars don't fall apart. Either that, or improve public transportation from Pacifica.

A couple of the candidates the other night proposed single-payer health coverage, which is a euphemism for socialised (government-run) medicine. How are they going to maintain our health when they can't even maintain a freakin' freeway.

Wilson is a prick. If it was unclear before, his arrogance in the face of this recall proves it. Caving in to every special interest he thinks can get him votes, until we get the bills. So vote YES on the recall. I will not endorse a candidate for governor, but I would like to include this passage by Harry Browne, 2000 and 1996 presidential candidate.

...by supporting [Schwartenegger], the Republicans have demonstrated that their only remaining principle is an unshakable conviction to do anything necessary to win an election. The Democratic and Green candidates made it clear that the state must increase taxes. Arianna Huffington made it clear that – well, she didn't exactly make anything clear – but she had all sorts of ideas for upsetting the lives of Californians. Schwarzenegger made it clear that he was going to lure business back to the state by spending tens of billions of dollars on new "infrastructure" (government boondoggles). And why is it important to bring business back to the state? Because "when you bring them back to California, it brings revenue back to California. And when you have more revenue, you then can afford to take care of all those programs that need to be taken care of." (It wasn't so long ago that California had a $1 billion annual budget, and the state didn't fall into the Pacific Ocean. But now it seems $100 billion isn't enough to fund "all those programs.") [Want bigger government?] So in any modern election, you have three choices: 1. Vote Libertarian, knowing your candidate won't win, but at least giving you the satisfaction of being able to tell the politicians you don't want to play in their games. 2. Don't vote at all, refusing to pretend your vote is going to alter the future of the republic. 3. Vote Republican or Democrat, and try not to look at yourself in the mirror for a week or so afterward.