RE: [lpsf-discuss] This election

Thanks Kelly,

Gonzales is gaining my respect for his refusal to approve large
infrastructure projects until the economic impact is evaluated relative
to the overall City budget. But that doesn't mean that I will endorse
him or vote for him. If the Newsom position on eminent domain is a swing
position for you, then vote your heart. My heart isn't with either of
these candidates or their platforms.


Back to the original request Chris made (sorry, I was in Yosemite and
away from email):

I still say no recommendation for Mayor, since we have a few ardent
supporters of one candidate or the other, and the vast majority of us
don't even want to pull the lever for either one, much less tie the
LPSF's name to one of them.

I believe we tried to needle Hallinan just after the candidates'
forum, by saying that the recommendation for Fazio was close, with
the clincher being that Hallinan didn't bother to show up at our
meeting, as Fazio did. So, if we're still trying to keep the man's
ear at least a little, I think the LPSF should recommend Hallinan.
He's already gotten the message from us that we don't like DAs who
play politics (like fajitagate), so further refusing to recommend a
candidate who is pretty good on drug issues only makes us look petty,
IMHO. If we were the libertarian purists union, I'd be in the "no
recommendations for anyone" camp, but we are the Libertarian PARTY,
so I don't think it's terrible for us to play a little politics,
especially with a man who probably shows up on the Nolan Chart on the
border of Liberal and Libertarian.


- -----Original Message-----