Recall Reinstated; Candidates Begin Last Lap

Re “Court Restores Oct. 7 Recall Vote,” Sept. 24: If you weren’t already turned off to voting because you thought it didn’t matter, now it very likely doesn’t matter. The one-person, one-vote concept went down the drain with the court’s decision that the election should go forward despite some counties’ flawed voting technology. It is a sad day for democracy. We are preaching it everywhere else in the world while losing it here at home.

L.E. Finney

Laguna Niguel

*

Re “Return of Donations Ordered,” Sept. 23: It really makes me ill, the way Cruz Bustamante has blatantly abused the laws of this state. The mere fact that he deposited large donations into an old account that was established before Proposition 34 passed seems to me to be an act of deception and of intention. What kind of leader would he make? If his example to the public is “do it till they say you can’t, and, by the way, make sure you spend the money before they rule on it, just in case,” just imagine what we don’t know about. Way to go, Bustamante -- that’s the way to be an example for how to run this state. Sign me “recovering Democrat.”

Margaret Buckley

Long Beach

*

After a judge ruled that Bustamante violated state election laws and ordered him to return $4 million, the lieutenant governor said: “The decision was a total vindication of Cruz Bustamante.”

What would he have said if he had actually won the case?

I. Nelson Rose

Encino

*

Although he later backpedaled on it, Darrell Issa’s statement Monday that California voters should vote no on the recall if both Tom McClintock and Arnold Schwarzenegger stay in the race was one of those wonderful moments when a politician says something that is more revealing than he or she probably intended it to be. Here it is, straight from the horse’s mouth: This recall has never been about replacing an officeholder who has committed actual malfeasance in office. It has always been about a Republican attempt to overturn the results of a legitimate election.

Steve Omlid

Upland

*

Re “Family Values Down the Toilet,” by Robert Scheer, Commentary, Sept. 23: As a Republican (and soccer mom), I am disgusted and bewildered as to how the Republican Woman’s Caucus in California can justify endorsing Schwarzenegger. If Republicans don’t stand by their values, what exactly will differentiate us from the Democrats? I hope the caucus members will reconsider their endorsement and take a good hard look at McClintock. He has experience, good character and actually knows the issues.

Angelina Sberna-Sotsky

Manhattan Beach

*

Re “Schwarzenegger’s Risky Defense: He Stretched Truth,” Sept. 22: Arnold embellishes his sexual experiences. Arnold embellishes on his use of drugs. Arnold embellishes his bodybuilding experiences. Arnold embellishes on his role as a grifter after the 1971 San Fernando earthquake. Arnold embellishes his acting abilities. Arnold embellishes on the voters’ need to know what he stands for, saying that they don’t want to be bothered by numbers and need to trust him. Arnold embellishes on his credentials to govern.

Arnold says embellishments are “sell statements” and that if you make them “everybody will love you.” Arnold, this consumer does not buy your statements, does not believe what you say, does not love you, believes you are dishonest and will not vote for you.

Lydia Kaplan

Oxnard