Davis Recall Necessary

I would like to start off by saying how pleased I am to see something in The Spectrum about the California Recall election and subsequently the Governor-Elect Schwarzenegger (even though in the title of the article his name was misspelled) in the Oct. 13 edition of George Zornick's column. As someone from California, I feel compelled to give my opinion on this matter.

As for the flipped claim that Gray Davis had to take two months out of his busy schedule to go on the campaign trail instead of governing the state is laughable. Most Californians - about 55 percent of them - are fed up with Davis's governing of the state and the fact that he wasn't governing the state for two months is a great thing.

I don't understand the claim that the recall was "illogical." The recall amendment in California's constitution has been there since the beginning of the last century and is also on the books of many other states. It may seem illogical to some East Coast people, but things are different out in the West Coast, as this election has shown. The point is that Californians were fed up with Davis and his poor handling of the state's business. Many people also believe that Davis is as corrupt as they come in politics and that a change was necessary.

Now, the other comment about Schwarzenegger that he "beat out experienced political candidates for the seat." Which other experienced candidates were you referring to? You can't possibly mean the Lieutenant Gov. Cruz Bustamante, the man who accepted and then used millions of illegal contributions form Native American tribes. Next in line, you have the ultra-conservative Tom McClintock. You can't possibly be thinking about that guy. We may be a little "out there" in the West, but we aren't that crazy. I won't continue down the list of the other candidates who are much more "experienced." It seems that you are confusing experience with actual know-how or potential.

The fact that Schwarzenegger is a political newcomer can be seen as a good thing and it is not like he isn't surrounding himself with smart or experienced people. Californians asked themselves, "Do we want an 'experienced' and corrupt politician or do we want a new-comer who can change things?"

Schwarzenegger was very vague about his policies and stances, but it was for good political reason. I would like to remind you that coming into the 1932 election Franklin Roosevelt was very vague about his policies; only calling his plan a "New Deal" and saying essentially "we need more jobs." If you are the front-runner, it is your prerogative to tell people as little as you want. Give Schwarzenegger time to reveal his plan for the state. Don't worry; it will come soon enough. As for debates, there was only one other debate that happened without Schwarzenegger present and he had no reason to debate against Davis, because he wasn't a candidate.

The point about Schwarzenegger's allegations of groping women and admiring Hitler is a very valid one. I am not defending him in that matter at all, but we focus on too much of the dirty politics (which, by the way, Davis is notorious for digging up or even fabricating). It did seem, however, that your point was not to bring attention to this serious matter, but rather to just take a pot shot.

Calling Gray Davis a "competent political leader" is a greatly irresponsible and a grave insult to actual competent political leaders. Davis did not solve any problems; he just created them. His whole campaign during the recall was basically saying, "just give me a second chance," this was, of course, after he finished calling it a "Republican hostile takeover" and realized that people just didn't like him.

The bottom line is that California didn't recall Davis because they wanted Schwarzenegger or some other celebrity image. We recalled Davis because he is a corrupt politician who mismanaged California. I am proud to say that I am from California and that our governor is "The Terminator."