Here's something you might be interested in.
While this proposition proposes "safe and reliable" high-speed rail, what it delivers is an expensive bailout to our unsafe and unreliable nationalized train services.
Yes, we do need better transportation in California. But this massive outlay during a time of recession doesn't make much sense. Spending an equivalent amount on other infrastructure would yield a better return for our money. Besides, the design of this proposed system would mostly by-pass San Diego. The residents of Normal Heights shouldn't be subsidizing Northern California.
I support improved transportation, but I think regional solutions work best. How about funding light-rail along Adams and El Cajon? That would actually help Normal Heights...not this expensive Northern California boondoggle.
Vote NO on 1A.
I don't have much time for anthropomorphic fantasies about animals raised for food. I am a devoted carnivore who likes rare steaks and raw seafood.
Still, there is some merit to collectively deciding that while these animals are being farmed for our benefit, we have a duty to avoid treating them with excessive cruelty before we eat them. The measures in this proposition seem to strike a balance between our desire for meat and the animals' comfort and safety.
Besides, humane conditions are known to decrease the risks of disease in our food animals. Since these diseases are sometimes passed along to us, it's in our own interests to ensure a safe food supply. It will probably affect prices, but I think it's worth it in the long run. Those of us in Normal Heights can afford to pay a bit more for food safety and humane treatment of farm animals.
Vote YES on 2.
Who can be against caring for sick children?
That's the strategy for the people selling this proposition to us. They tug on our heartstrings in an attempt to distract our attention away from the costs of this proposition.
Yes, I want our children's hospitals to be world-class. But this doesn't come automatically from erecting expensive facilities and signature buildings. We'd be better off spending this type of money on basic health care for not just children, but everyone in California. Directing money to only one area of care may be good politics, but it's lousy public policy. There is always a trade-off, and this isn't a good one. Focusing only on children's hospitals is short-sighted, and probably a big payoff to construction companies.
My Normal Heights neighbors are already paying enough in taxes, and deserve a community health clinic in our neighborhood. Building yet more children's hospitals sounds good, but doesn't get my support.
Vote NO on 3.
Jim Holman, the very nice man and staunch Catholic who publishes the Reader, has spent a lot of money promoting this previously rejected proposition. It's his money, and he is free to spend it however he likes.
But the television commercials touting this measure are just a bunch of hooey. This isn't about stopping sexual predators. It's about preventing young women from getting abortions.
Just what Normal Heights needs...more teen pregnancies and unwanted children.
This proposition deserves to be defeated once again.
Vote NO on 4.
The opponents to this measure are bald-faced liars. They claim that calling off the war on pot smokers is a "get out of jail free card".
Baloney. They should never be incarcerated in the first place.
Humankind has been using intoxicants since the dawn of time. Our ethically blind DA Bonnie Dumanis is the spokesperson for this measure, and her goal is to become the next California Attorney General. Cops and prosecutors are always looking for yet another reason to lock people up, and this measure puts a little common sense back into our public policy. Pot smokers shouldn't be in prison in the first place, and this measure simply restates common sense.
Keep your pot smoking Normal Heights neighbors out of jail.
Vote YES on 5.
Another step on the road to totalitarianism. This law creates new crimes and diverts funding away from schools toward the prisons.
The prison-industrial complex and the red-neck cops behind this proposition have no shame. They want everyone who looks at them sideways behind bars. Enough with the "law and order" lies.
Normal Heights residents don't support totalitarianism and won't believe the lies of the cops and prosecutors behind this attempt to expand the definition of criminality.
Vote NO on 6.
On the face of it, this looks good. More clean energy. Whoopee!
But it's deeply flawed. It's going to benefit mostly big companies like Sempra while hurting smaller producers. It gives away public money for their transmission lines, and introduces yet more hurdles to innovation.
It's a good try, and I hope the backers will return with an improved measure that's not so arbitrary next time. But for now, it's got too many flaws to get my support.
Normal Heights needs real transportation and energy production solutions, but until we get this we cannot be misled into voting for flawed propositions.
Vote NO on 7.
Inserts medieval religious ideology into the state constitution. Backed by ugly liars like Doug "Papa" Manchester whose bigotry is exceeded only by ignorance of history, sociology, biology, and all the research on human sexuality.
If you're a bible-thumping fool who believes in talking snakes an rib-women created by an angry sky god who condemns not only homosexuality but also shellfish...well, you shouldn't be voting anyway.
If, on the other hand, you have an IQ above room temperature and any capacity for sympathy, you know this is just another attempt by religious bigots to cast stones at folks who already have a pretty tough time in our society.
Don't be fooled by lies about kindergarten kids being forced to read "The King and the King". If that's the best argument the proponents of this deeply flawed proposition can come up with, they deserve to be defeated at the polls.
The well-educated residents of Normal Heights know better, and will vote overwhelmingly against propositions from hate-filled bigots.
Vote NO on 8.
Another misleading ploy by cops and prison guards to keep people in jail longer. There are already laws on the books that protect victims and allow them to testify at sentencing. This proposition is not needed.
Rather, it continues the mind set that says "lock em up and throw away the key". We already have a shameful record of incarcerating more of our citizens than anywhere else in the developed world.
Let's knock it off. Never ending punishment rehabilitates no one. Let's instead spend a little money on treatment, education, and job skills training that could actually reduce recidivism. The cops are already wallowing in too much public money, and this would make it worse.
Normal Heights needs that money to be spent on local infrastructure, education, and transportation.
Vote NO on 9.
T. Boone Pickens has bankrolled this proposition because it would funnel our money right into his pockets.
Sure, we all want alternative energy vehicles, but we don't need this self-interested proposition to achieve that goal. Pickens is rich enough already.
Normal Heights voters know better than to give away their hard-earned money to a billionaire.
Vote NO on 10.
Yes, Yes, Yes!
The way our legislature draws district boundaries is a disgrace. This proposition would change all that.
Finally, we'd have some actual democracy in California by encouraging competitive elections.
Wouldn't that be a nice change in Normal Heights. When arrogant and safe professional politicians are plundering our neighborhood, we'll be able to vote them out of office.
Vote YES on 11.
$1.8 Billion dollars favoring one segment of society over another. How brazen can you get?
I'm a veteran, and I'd sure like to get such a gift from all you taxpayers out there. But this is way over the top. Veterans already have a number of programs, both at the federal and state level to help us buy homes. This proposition is just not needed now, and would result in propping up developers and land speculators rather than helping the men and women of our armed forces.
I urge all my Normal Heights neighbors, and especially my fellow veterans, to reject this expensive proposition.
Vote NO on 11.
While this proposition proposes "safe and reliable" high-speed rail, what it delivers is an expensive bailout to our unsafe and unreliable nationalized train services.
Yes, we do need better transportation in California. But this massive outlay during a time of recession doesn't make much sense. Spending an equivalent amount on other infrastructure would yield a better return for our money. Besides, the design of this proposed system would mostly by-pass San Diego. The residents of Normal Heights shouldn't be subsidizing Northern California.
I support improved transportation, but I think regional solutions work best. How about funding light-rail along Adams and El Cajon? That would actually help Normal Heights...not this expensive Northern California boondoggle.
Vote NO on 1A.
I don't have much time for anthropomorphic fantasies about animals raised for food. I am a devoted carnivore who likes rare steaks and raw seafood.
Still, there is some merit to collectively deciding that while these animals are being farmed for our benefit, we have a duty to avoid treating them with excessive cruelty before we eat them. The measures in this proposition seem to strike a balance between our desire for meat and the animals' comfort and safety.
Besides, humane conditions are known to decrease the risks of disease in our food animals. Since these diseases are sometimes passed along to us, it's in our own interests to ensure a safe food supply. It will probably affect prices, but I think it's worth it in the long run. Those of us in Normal Heights can afford to pay a bit more for food safety and humane treatment of farm animals.
Vote YES on 2.
Who can be against caring for sick children?
That's the strategy for the people selling this proposition to us. They tug on our heartstrings in an attempt to distract our attention away from the costs of this proposition.
Yes, I want our children's hospitals to be world-class. But this doesn't come automatically from erecting expensive facilities and signature buildings. We'd be better off spending this type of money on basic health care for not just children, but everyone in California. Directing money to only one area of care may be good politics, but it's lousy public policy. There is always a trade-off, and this isn't a good one. Focusing only on children's hospitals is short-sighted, and probably a big payoff to construction companies.
My Normal Heights neighbors are already paying enough in taxes, and deserve a community health clinic in our neighborhood. Building yet more children's hospitals sounds good, but doesn't get my support.
Vote NO on 3.
Jim Holman, the very nice man and staunch Catholic who publishes the Reader, has spent a lot of money promoting this previously rejected proposition. It's his money, and he is free to spend it however he likes.
But the television commercials touting this measure are just a bunch of hooey. This isn't about stopping sexual predators. It's about preventing young women from getting abortions.
Just what Normal Heights needs...more teen pregnancies and unwanted children.
This proposition deserves to be defeated once again.
Vote NO on 4.
The opponents to this measure are bald-faced liars. They claim that calling off the war on pot smokers is a "get out of jail free card".
Baloney. They should never be incarcerated in the first place.
Humankind has been using intoxicants since the dawn of time. Our ethically blind DA Bonnie Dumanis is the spokesperson for this measure, and her goal is to become the next California Attorney General. Cops and prosecutors are always looking for yet another reason to lock people up, and this measure puts a little common sense back into our public policy. Pot smokers shouldn't be in prison in the first place, and this measure simply restates common sense.
Keep your pot smoking Normal Heights neighbors out of jail.
Vote YES on 5.
Another step on the road to totalitarianism. This law creates new crimes and diverts funding away from schools toward the prisons.
The prison-industrial complex and the red-neck cops behind this proposition have no shame. They want everyone who looks at them sideways behind bars. Enough with the "law and order" lies.
Normal Heights residents don't support totalitarianism and won't believe the lies of the cops and prosecutors behind this attempt to expand the definition of criminality.
Vote NO on 6.
On the face of it, this looks good. More clean energy. Whoopee!
But it's deeply flawed. It's going to benefit mostly big companies like Sempra while hurting smaller producers. It gives away public money for their transmission lines, and introduces yet more hurdles to innovation.
It's a good try, and I hope the backers will return with an improved measure that's not so arbitrary next time. But for now, it's got too many flaws to get my support.
Normal Heights needs real transportation and energy production solutions, but until we get this we cannot be misled into voting for flawed propositions.
Vote NO on 7.
Inserts medieval religious ideology into the state constitution. Backed by ugly liars like Doug "Papa" Manchester whose bigotry is exceeded only by ignorance of history, sociology, biology, and all the research on human sexuality.
If you're a bible-thumping fool who believes in talking snakes an rib-women created by an angry sky god who condemns not only homosexuality but also shellfish...well, you shouldn't be voting anyway.
If, on the other hand, you have an IQ above room temperature and any capacity for sympathy, you know this is just another attempt by religious bigots to cast stones at folks who already have a pretty tough time in our society.
Don't be fooled by lies about kindergarten kids being forced to read "The King and the King". If that's the best argument the proponents of this deeply flawed proposition can come up with, they deserve to be defeated at the polls.
The well-educated residents of Normal Heights know better, and will vote overwhelmingly against propositions from hate-filled bigots.
Vote NO on 8.
Another misleading ploy by cops and prison guards to keep people in jail longer. There are already laws on the books that protect victims and allow them to testify at sentencing. This proposition is not needed.
Rather, it continues the mind set that says "lock em up and throw away the key". We already have a shameful record of incarcerating more of our citizens than anywhere else in the developed world.
Let's knock it off. Never ending punishment rehabilitates no one. Let's instead spend a little money on treatment, education, and job skills training that could actually reduce recidivism. The cops are already wallowing in too much public money, and this would make it worse.
Normal Heights needs that money to be spent on local infrastructure, education, and transportation.
Vote NO on 9.
T. Boone Pickens has bankrolled this proposition because it would funnel our money right into his pockets.
Sure, we all want alternative energy vehicles, but we don't need this self-interested proposition to achieve that goal. Pickens is rich enough already.
Normal Heights voters know better than to give away their hard-earned money to a billionaire.
Vote NO on 10.
Yes, Yes, Yes!
The way our legislature draws district boundaries is a disgrace. This proposition would change all that.
Finally, we'd have some actual democracy in California by encouraging competitive elections.
Wouldn't that be a nice change in Normal Heights. When arrogant and safe professional politicians are plundering our neighborhood, we'll be able to vote them out of office.
Vote YES on 11.
$1.8 Billion dollars favoring one segment of society over another. How brazen can you get?
I'm a veteran, and I'd sure like to get such a gift from all you taxpayers out there. But this is way over the top. Veterans already have a number of programs, both at the federal and state level to help us buy homes. This proposition is just not needed now, and would result in propping up developers and land speculators rather than helping the men and women of our armed forces.
I urge all my Normal Heights neighbors, and especially my fellow veterans, to reject this expensive proposition.
Vote NO on 11.