Our 2012 Election Guide

Right. Of course. We get it.

Who has time to read? Who has time to read newspapers?

Unemployed stoners, for one. We have time to read newspapers – and periodicals and books, as well as all the other stuff that passes for reading these days. We have time to read, and think, and try to figure it all out. That’s sort of what we specialize in.

This Tuesday, there’s an election. Americans will select a President, Californians will rubber-stamp another term in the Senate for their Auntie Dianne, and Los Angelenos will be asked to pick sides in a condom fight. We’ve researched the issues; we’ve read the Propositions – for which we feel strongly that we deserve some sort of remuneration, or at least some fawning appreciation. Although we’re not completely clear on every detail – there’s a lot of “ins” and “outs,” a lot of “what-have-yous” – we’ve educated ourselves well-enough so you don’t have to!

MichaelKonik.com’s 2012 Election Guide

Los Angeles Measure A: NO. More elections + less appointments = better democracy.

Los Angeles Measure B: NO. Legislating condom use in porno? This ludicrous ordinance illustrates why many folks with guns and bibles, folks who don’t know the difference between a reverse gangbang and a reverse cowgirl, view government as an intrusive behemoth.

Los Angeles Measure J: YES. Extending the half-cent Transportation Tax on paper makes it easier to sell cheap bonds for new subways and bike lanes.

California Proposition 30: YES. Spending has been cut; now it’s time to raise some revenue. Pony up, rich folks.

California Proposition 31: NO. When a relatively well-schooled fellow cannot decipher what it is exactly a Proposition is meant to do, it’s a strong sign that obfuscation and potential chicanery are afoot.

California Proposition 32: NO. Perhaps the foulest, smelliest, most rotten Proposition on the slate. This is Big Business conducting war on Labor through the ballot box. Disgusting and deserving of expensive failure.

California Proposition 33: NO. Probably the second foulest Proposition on the ballot. Vote “yes” only if you want one company, Mercury Insurance, to enhance its business at your expense.

California Proposition 34: YES. Whatever arguments once worked in favor of the Death Penalty no longer stand up to scrutiny. It’s time to abolish capital punishment.

California Proposition 35: NO. Human trafficking is a serious concern. But this over-reaching initiative uses everyone’s favorite target – the sex offender – as a tool to chip away at Internet privacy.

California Proposition 36: YES. The three-strikes law needs to be refined. This Proposition – that only violent or serious crimes count toward your third strike – allows us to avoid sending people to prison for 25-to-life on account of stealing a loaf of bread, a la Les Miserables.

California Proposition 37: NO. This is a painful “no,” particularly in light of the astonishig amounts of money big corporatations like Pepsi and Monsanto have spent to advance their putrid agenda. We generally support transparency, especially in product labeling. But this Proposition, meant to require labeling of some genetically modified foods, is so riddled with weird loopholes that it could actually end up misleading consumers, the opposite of its good intentions. Back to the drawing board, Food & Water Watch.

California Proposition 38: NO. Raise taxes solely to pay for education? Sounds good until you remember that there are about 14 other problems that need addressing – which is what the more flexible Proposition 30 is supposed to do.

California Proposition 39: YES. Hell, yes. Time to close a gaping loophole that’s been encouraging companies here to move out of state.

California Proposition 40: YES. We support independent, citizen-drawn redistricting, not the stinky maps drawn by politicians and their patrons.

Los Angeles County District Attorney: PASS. Given their unenlightened views on cannabis law enforcement and the death penalty, neither of the two candidates on the ballot is an appealing choice.

Member of the State Assembly: PASS. In a race between two Democratic Party brand candidates, Butler seems slightly less in thrall to development money than Bloom. But where’s the third party candidate?

United States Representative: PASS. Two competing sub-brands of the Money Party. No other options offered.

United States Senator: PASS. Increasingly dotty Auntie Dianne doesn’t need our vote, but someone else surely might. Unfortunately, the only other person on the ballot is a pro-business Republican.

President of the United States: ROCKY ANDERSON, JUSTICE PARTY. How debased has our democracy become? The candidate whose ideas and ideals most closely align with MK.com, the one whose policy positions most accurately reflect our thinking, can earn votes only as a write-in. Like many so-called “third-parties,” Justice has been left off the ballot in California.

You may also like...