Actually, we have 11 of them so far, all on the November 4 ballot. The deadline has passed for initiative measures put on the ballot by voter petition, but the Legislature still has time to add a few more. Secretary of State Debra Bowen assigned numbers to those already lined up, starting with Proposition 1.

But wait, you say. If we just voted on Propositions 98 and 99 on June 3, why don't we get Proposition 100 in November?

Ballot measure numbering runs on a 10-year cycle, and that cycle began in November 1998, so it just ran out and is starting over. If the Legislature adds more propositions, lawmakers can decide whether to add them to the end (Propositions 12, 13, etc.) or to the beginning (Proposition 1A, 1B, etc.).

Those are just the statewide measures. We could still get an MTA sales tax from the county, and on Tuesday the City Council could add a parcel tax to fight gang violence.

What will those be called on the ballot? We don't yet know. They are lettered instead of numbered, and are designated by the registrar-recorder.

Backers of tax measures believe the November election is their best shot at victory. The thinking goes like this: Los Angeles voters will be coming out in droves to vote for Barack Obama, or against a Republican of any stripe, and against the ban on gay marriage (Proposition 8).

The ballot is still growing. To keep up, check in regularly at www.latimes.com/elections.

The point of Times endorsements is not to pick winners, but to back those candidates who would do the best job in the office regardless of whether they have a chance of winning. Still — we want to know how our picks did. And we might even tell ourselves that a Times endorsement helped them cross the finish line first. So here it is:

Los Angeles Superior Court endorsements and results:

Office 4: We endorsed Ralph Dau. He won. Score one for us.

Office 69: Serena Murillo. She was beaten by Harvey Silberman. We're 1-1.

Office 72: Hilleri Grossman Merritt. Leading, but she's in a runoff with Steven Simons. We're, uh, 1-1-1.

Office 82: Cynthia Loo. Leading, but in a runoff with Thomas Rubinson. 1-1-2.

Office 84: Pat Connolly. Leading, but in a runoff with Lori-Ann Jones. 1-1-3.

Office 94: Michael O'Gara. Leading, but in a runoff with C. Edward Mack. 1-1-4.

Office 95: Patricia Nieto. A win. 2-1-4.

Office 119: Jared D. Moses. A win. 3-1-4.

Office 123: Kathleen Blanchard. A win. 4-1-4.

Office 125: James Bianco. A win. 5-1-4. Things are looking up.

Office 154: Michael Jesic. Runoff with Rocky Crabb. 5-1-5.

So there it is for judicial endorsements. Our picks lost one and came out ahead in the other 10 contested races, with five victorious outright and five ending up in a Nov. 4 runoff.

In other races: We endorsed three incumbent county elected officials and, no surprise, they all won. District Attorney Steve Cooley and Supervisors Don Knabe and Michael D. Antonovich. That puts us at 8-1-5, but we can hardly take credit for those. In the Second District supervisorial race, our pick — Bernard C. Parks — came in second to Mark Ridley-Thomas but is in a runoff. We're 8-1-6.

We said no on Proposition 98 and yes on Proposition 99. So did voters. 10-1-6.

We endorsed in five partisan legislative primaries, and each of our candidates won their nomination: Republican for Senate Bob Huff, Democrat for Senate Fran Pavley, and Democrats for Assembly Bob Blumenfield, John A. Perez, and Isadore Hall. Our final, tally: 15 wins, 1 loss, and 6 runoffs.

And this all means — what? That the Los Angeles Times is the heaviest hitter in town, and that our endorsement is what makes the difference in elections; or that the Times editorial page is a follower rather than a leader, and endorses only the establishment candidates who already have the inside track; or that these races were really no contest, with one candidate the obvious choice in each of them; or nothing at all. Take your pick. And get ready for November.

The man named Bill Johnson/Daniel Johnson/William D. Johnson/James O. Pace has been handily defeated in his quest to be elected to the Los Angeles Superior Court. Read up to learn why, but here's the short version: he wrote a book calling for non-whites to be denied U.S. citizenship and deported. He led an organization advocating for a constitutional amendment toward that end. More recently, he helped a ridiculous write-in campaign against six Latino judges. He was bested in the race for Office No. 125 by Los Angeles Superior Court Commissioner James Bianco, whom the Times endorsed.

By the way, this was at least the fourth political campaign for Johnson, who ran as a Republican for the Hawaii state Assembly, a Republican for Congress from Wyoming, and a Democrat for Congress from Arizona.

Also winning outright are Deputy District Attorney Kathleen Blanchard (who also won a Times endorsement) in Office No. 123; Deputy D.A. Jared Moses (ditto) in Office No. 119; and Superior Court Commissioner Patricia Nieto (ditto) in Office No. 95. That makes four new judges.

It's great news in the case of Blanchard and Moses, not just because they'll make good judges, but also because their opponents were so eminently unqualified. It's good news in Nieto's case too, but a shame that her opponent, Deputy Attorney General Lance Winters, cannot take the bench as well, since he is also a great candidate. Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger, take notice when it's next time to appoint someone to the bench in Los Angeles.

The only sitting judge to be challenged, Ralph Dau, also easily won election in Office No. 4, as did those six Latino judges against whom no write-in challengers ever materialized.

The balance of the Superior Court races appear to be headed toward November runoffs.

Here is a complete list of the Times editorial board's endosements and here we make the case for our judicial choices.

More than half the vote is in, but Mark Ridley-Thomas has less than half of it. That means he and Bernard C. Parks are in for five more months of campaigning as they head toward a Nov. 4 runoff in their battle to become the newest member of the Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors. Hey, you members of the campaign donor class -- open your wallets. Again.

It's bad news for the county, as its government prepares to deal with Martin Luther King Medical Center and other health issues in South Los Angeles; and state budget cuts; and a host of other problems -- with a long period of uncertainty about the future.

It also throws a wrench into the works of special elections to fill either Ridley-Thomas' Senate seat or Parks' Los Angeles City Council seat. Which seat will open up? When will the special election be?

There likely will be several runoffs for Los Angeles Superior Court judicial seats. With more than 60% of the vote counted, these runoffs appear likely:

Office No. 72: Hilleri Merritt and Steven Simons

Office No. 82 Cynthia Loo and Thomas Rubinson

Office No. 84 Pat Connolly and Lori-Ann Jones

Office No. 94 Michael O'Gara and C. Edward Mack

Office No. 154 Michael Jesic and Rocky Crabb

Things could change as more votes come in. But don't hold your breath.

Environmental hero Fran Pavley, the former assemblywoman who authored California's landmark global warming bill, appears to be heading back to Sacramento after two years off. It looks like she's easily defeating current Assemblyman Lloyd Levine in the hard-fought Democratic primary battle for state Senate district 23.

That's the more-liberal-than-thou district that takes in parts of the West San Fernando Valley, some of the Westside, Santa Monica, Malibu and on up the coast a bit. Sheila Kuehl is being termed out of that seat this year. One odd thing about the district -- it abuts the Senate district that currently is held by congressional candidate Tom McClintock, perhaps the Legislature's most ardent conservative. How do those political map-makers pull these things off?

With just over a quarter of the votes counted statewide, victory has been declared by the campaign to defeat the Proposition 98 quest to protect property from some government takings and phase out rent control. They are the same folks who put together Proposition 99, a sort of taking-reform-lite.

Here's part of a statement from Tom Adams, president of the California League of Conservation Voters board:

Twice now - with the defeat of Prop. 90 in 2006 and Prop. 98 tonight - voters have rejected fraudulent initiative schemes by special interests. Despite the fact that landlords spent nearly $8 million to fool the voters about Prop 98, the voters once again showed that they see these cheesy schemes for what they are.  Hopefully, this will send a strong signal to others that the voters have little tolerance for dishonest tactics.

There was a little deception all around. The No-98/Yes-99 folks put out lots of mail featuring elderly renters worrying about being evicted with the repeal of rent control laws. In fact, rent control would have continued to apply until they vacated their apartments. But the fact that repeal of rent control was slipped into the measure without much fanfare apparently was enough to turn off a majority of voters, not to mention a majority of newspaper editorial boards. The Times editorialized against 98 and for 99.  So this time, at least, we had company. Not like in February, when our page came out in favor of Prop 93 term limits reform, along with pretty much nobody else -- except the papers in Vallejo and Vacaville.

Update from AP: Not even close.

A staple of election season is the newspaper story or editorial that laments that no one knows anything about judicial candidates. So it's gratifying to see that some of those stories this year advised voters not to mark their ballots for candidate Bill Johnson.

How do they know about Johnson? How do they know that he wrote a 1985 book under the name James O. Pace, called Amendment to the Constitution, calling for all non-white people to be stripped of U.S. citizenship and deported? How do they know that he led an organization to drum up support for the amendment? How do they know that he ran for Congress in Wyoming as a Republican and Arizona as a Democrat, all while keeping his Los Angeles law practice?

They know because the Metropolitan News-Enterprise, a small Los Angeles daily newspaper that covers courts, judges and the legal community, reported on Johnson earlier this year. That report led to a Times editorial and several opinion blog posts, a story on KTTV Fox Channel 11, a story in the Jewish Journal, endorsements for Johnson's opponent in the Daily News and other papers belonging to the Los Angeles Newspaper Group, a reference to Johnson's past in a Daily Breeze story, and a story in the Pasadena Weekly. Final election results aren't in, but it seems that at least the word got out, thanks to the MetNews.

To be fair to the Pasadena Weekly, writer Kevin Uhrich had personal experience with Johnson in the Pace days, and he recounted it in his recent story. But the word about Johnson is out in large part because MetNews editor Roger Grace does something that no one at any other publication in the state does -- he digs deep into judicial races and subjects candidates to the kind of scrutiny that other papers complain never is used. I worked with Grace for 11 years at the MetNews and it was a treat to watch him in action at judicial election time.

As far as the complaint that no one knows anything about judicial candidates, I have to say: Not true. MetNews readers know, as do readers of the Los Angeles Times endorsements.

I like to think we at the Times editorial page do a much better job of evaluating judicial candidates, because of what I learned at the MetNews, than we might otherwise. Whether or not that is the case, the Johnson episode shows that a small, independent newspaper still can make a big difference.

As other election news swirls, the Daily Breeze has this seemingly tiny but in fact very important story: Rep. Maxine Waters (D-Los Angeles) has let go of her previously tenacious support for Hillary Clinton and is now a Barack Obama supporter.

The move is significant to anyone trying to figure out what Clinton meant when she said she wouldn't be making any decisions this evening. Is she really going to try for the VP spot, or is she taking this all the way to the convention? Waters' move signals that Clinton's bid for the top spot is over.

Obama clinched the nomination based on primary results today in Montana and South Dakota.

Waters is an enormously influential figure in South Los Angeles and African American Democratic Party politics. Her endorsement is crucial to local candidates like Bernard C. Parks for county supervisor and Ron Wright for state Senate. Her slate card packs tremendous clout with voters.

She has been under tremendous pressure from other African American leaders to jettison Clinton for Obama, but she held firm. Until now.

Somebody -- anybody -- please just get 50% plus one tonight. Otherwise, like the folktale of the political consultant who comes out of his hole on election day but doesn't see his shadow (that's how the story goes, right?) we have five more months of campaigning.

But it's looking grim in these early hours. With a still-paltry 1.35% of precincts reporting, Mark Ridley-Thomas has a comfortable lead over Bernard C. Parks in the race for Los Angeles county supervisor in the Second District. But it's not comfortable enough. Ridley-Thomas has 47.12% of the vote to Parks' 35.57%, but he needs 50% to avoid a runoff.

That might be tough. There are seven other candidates in this race, and even if none of them captures more than a few thousand votes, it could be enough to prevent anyone getting a majority. As it stands now, even Morris "Big Money" Griffin, the man who came up with the idea of an "ethnic lottery" so that winnings would only go to people of the same ethnic group as those who bought tickets, has 2% of the early vote.

So if the campaign ending now was all about Ridley-Thomas and Parks, the next five months will be, well, more Ridley-Thomas and Parks.

It's that way in any non-partisan race with more than two candidates. There will likely be at least a couple judicial runoffs in November.

It's a good opportunity for the New America Foundation to move forward with its plan for instant runoff voting, in which the runoff takes place simultaneously with the election. San Francisco currently uses IRV, as the insiders call it. Hear KPCC's Frank Stoltze report on New America's presentation yesterday at Los Angeles City Hall.

By the way, this 50% plus one issue doesn't apply to partisan primaries, like state Senate and Assembly. A Democrat just needs one more vote than his or her competitors -- same for Republicans -- to win the primary. There is a general election between party winners in November, but most districts are virtually owned by one party or the other, so it's really all being decided today.

The polls are still open, but a late-May survey from USAElectionPolls.com indicates Proposition 98 will go down. The sample size is tiny, but the smart money (backed up by my own experience this morning in an empty polling place) says voter turnout is going to be tiny as well. Anyway, they have opinion running 51% to 24% against Prop 98, and 44% to 33% for Prop 99.

The Times editorialized against 98 and for 99. For a complete list of our endorsements, check out Vote-o-rama, which will be taking on a new November form beginning tomorrow (or thereabouts).

Get out and vote. Fight the power.

In the course of endorsing District Attorney Steve Cooley for re-election in the June 3 primary, The Times editorial board reminded voters that Cooley promised to serve only two terms (this would be his third). We also expressed alarm at his plan to anoint a successor. If he had kept his promise, we noted, there would be other qualified candidates running to succeed him instead of the two we believed would be worse than Cooley. Here's a link to the full editorial. Here's a brief selection:

As for Dist. Atty. Cooley, it is noteworthy that he criticized predecessor Gil Garcetti in 2000 for seeking a third term and promised that he would serve only two. This year, he is seeking his third.

It's not the first time a politician has broken a promise, but we recall his rationale -- the office benefits from "fresh eyes" on old problems. It held true then, and it holds true today. Under Cooley, the district attorney's office has done a competent job of handling felony prosecutions, and Cooley deserves credit for his principled stand on third strikes -- agreeing to prosecute them as strikes only when they are violent felonies. But if he stepped down now, as he had promised, other lawyers would be stepping up as candidates to reinvigorate the office.

We're especially concerned about Cooley's stated plan to stick around until he has groomed and selected a successor. That's a power that belongs to voters, not to him.

So it's with chagrin and a hint of admiration for his chutzpah that I take note of this Cooley mailer that quotes from the editorial in the lower right-hand corner and puts "Los Angeles Times" in huge letters to show we're on his team. "We go with Cooley." Well, we did say that.

Columnist Jonah Goldberg says Barack Obama's judgment on Iraq falls short:

[E]ven if you want to give Obama the benefit of the doubt, it's hard to give him the benefit of the facts.

As a candidate for the U.S. Senate in 2004, Obama said he would "unequivocally" oppose President Bush on the war. But once in office, he voted for every war-funding bill -- until he decided to run for president.

Contributing editor Ian Buruma wonders if "Asian values" are stopping Burmese leaders from helping their citizens. Writer A. S. Hamrah remembers a forgotten anniversary -- the day Valerie Solanas shot Andy Warhol. Former Republican congressman Mickey Edwards asks why Congress acts like it serves the president rather than the Constitution.

The editorial board remarks that the Universal Studios fire may have destroyed sets, but the movies they're in thankfully survive. The board also urges Israel and the U.S. to allow Palestinian scholarship students out of Gaza. Finally, the board reminds readers to vote today.

On the letters page, readers discuss the Michigan and Florida vote. William T. Fidurski of Clark, N.J. says, "On Saturday, in exemplification of its own worst traditions, the Democratic Party trashed both the sanctity of the vote and the principle of one person, one vote."

*Cartoon by Signe Wilkinson, Washington Post Writers Group

Nigerian Larry Bowoto says he was shot by soldiers in the pay of a Chevron Corp. subsidiary:

I was standing on a drilling platform in the Niger Delta run by Chevron Nigeria Ltd. More than 100 unarmed villagers joined me there to protest the loss of our fish, our clean water and our trees because of Chevron's oil production activities in our region, and to protest the loss of our traditional ways of supporting ourselves as a result of these activities.

The lawsuit I (and others) filed in 1999 contends that Chevron Nigeria's own documents show that it paid for, transported and supervised Nigerian military and police forces that responded to our protests. They opened fire on us; it is our contention that they did this without warning. Two of the protesters were killed; I and more than 10 others were wounded. Still others were arrested and beaten by the Nigerian authorities.

Columnist Rosa Brooks objects to the notion that Hillary Clinton represents all women. Contributing editor Bill Stall parses Prop. 13 after 30 years and says it's time for a change. And Dickinson College's Crispin Sartwell looks at affirmative action for an oppressed minority in academia -- conservatives.

The editorial board endorses legislative candidates and wonders what's next for SAG now that AFTRA has signed a deal.

On the letters page, readers discuss local parishes paying for the Catholic priests scandal. L.A.'s Susan North says, "Let the Vatican have a yard sale. Rome is ultimately responsible, and Rome should pay."

*Art by Richard Downs

Today's Op-Ed page asks UC academics and other experts for suggestions for the university system's incoming presidnet, Mark Yudof. And columnist Jonah Goldberg argues that attacking Michelle Obama is fair game:

[T]he Illinois senator's desire to protect his wife from criticism shows his heart's in the right place. The question is, where is his head?

If he truly finds it "unacceptable" for people to criticize his wife, he might want to rethink his policy of sending her out as his chief campaign surrogate, particularly when she has proved to be such a rich source of copy for journalists and barbs for critics.

And just out of curiosity, what does it mean, exactly, when a candidate finds something "unacceptable"? In a democracy, finding criticism unacceptable is a surefire way to drive yourself bonkers. It's like saying you find it unacceptable that bears use the woods for a bathroom.

On the editorial page, the board endorses Bernard C. Parks for the 2nd Supervisorial District. The board also criticizes the president's stimulus plan for excluding some legal immigrants and their spouses. And finally the board responds to ex-Assembly Speaker Fabian Nunez's claim that the media is crutinizing his spending habits because "they think I have to sleep under a cactus and eat from taco stands."

Readers discuss oil companies' high profits. Former Unocal Corp. chair Richard J. Stegemeier notes, "If Exxon Mobil's senior vice president, J. Stephen Simon, donated his entire 2007 salary of $12.5 million to gas price reduction, it would lower Exxon Mobil's pump price by 0.03 cents a gallon, or less than one cent per tank."

*Artwork by Susan Tibbles

In March, a Carson minister launched a write-in campaign against six Latino Los Angeles Superior Court judges, with the help of a USC student and a judicial candidate who wrote a book advocating the loss of citizenship and deportation for everyone in the U.S. who isn't a white person of European descent. The minister, Ronald C. Tan, explained at the time that he wanted to replace the six with Filipino judges who share his view of religion, abortion and other social issues.

The Metropolitan News-Enterprise reports today that no candidates filed to challenge the six. Under state election law, a write-in candidate is counted only if he or she qualifies by filing nomination papers. The Tuesday deadline came and went with no papers filed, the MetNews reported.

That's good news for Judges Juan Carlos Dominguez (in the Pomona North Courthouse); Hector M. Guzman (Torrance); Daniel S. Lopez (Pomona); Daniel P. Ramirez (Whittier); Jose Sandoval (the Foltz criminal courts building in downtown Los Angeles); and Michael Villalobos (West Covina). Unlike the 130 or so other unchallenged judges who are up for election this year, the names of the six will still appear on the June 3 ballot, but any write-in votes against them will be in vain.

Tan said in March that he was in the process of getting some of his "dear friends" to try to unseat the judges. It could be that his friends were less dear than he thought, or that they were a bit turned off by the participation of judicial candidate Bill Johnson, who wrote a 1985 book under the name James O. Pace calling for the repeal of the 14th and 15th amendments and the loss of citizenship for Asians and all other non-whites.

Why pick on Latinos? Because, Tan said, they would be easier to beat than judges with Anglo names.

It's the election officials' version of a rave! Without the music and the Ecstasy. Starting now, and rolling until midnight! Don't you dare miss it! Register to vote in the June 3 election! Your pick of three hot locations! The hippest Starbucks in town! Or the coolest courthouse west of La Brea! Or the rockinest registrar's headquarters, right where it's all happening — Norwalk! It's your last chance!

No, really. Los Angeles County elections officials will be on hand to register voters for the June stealth primary at three locations until midnight (pdf) and, for you folks who have aged out of the rave scene, five other locations until 9 p.m.

If you're already registered, and haven't changed parties or addresses, and haven't been convicted of a felony, you're OK. Otherwise, this is your final shot to be able to weigh in on two important ballot measures on government land-grabbing and, if you live in the Second Supervisorial District, it's your chance to decide the fate of Los Angeles County for the next 12 years. It's also your chance to make sure that the author of a tract proposing that all non-white people be expelled from the United States doesn't (or does; it's your vote, and for now it's still a free country) become a Los Angeles Superior Court judge. And that's no hype.

Here are the until-midnight hot spots:

Registrar-Recorder Headquarters, 12400 Imperial Hwy., Norwalk

Beverly Hills District Court, 9355 Burton Way, Beverly Hills

Magic Johnson Starbucks, 5301 W. Centinela, Los Angeles

Columnist Gregory Rodriguez explores whites' fear of decline:

Hillary Rodham Clinton is right. She has the broader and whiter political coalition, so she should, by all rights, be the Democratic presidential nominee.

After all, in other realms of the political process, we routinely refer to "black districts" or "Latino districts" and speak of the necessity of those jurisdictions to be represented by black or Latino elected officials. Well, then, because the American population is 66% white, maybe the United States is a de facto white district that should be represented accordingly.

Don't scoff at the idea. Ethnic and racial self-determination have been underlying factors in the formation of modern nations.

Author Glenn Hurowitz outs household products -- from Oreos to Burt's Bees soap -- that use destructive palm oil as an ingredient. George Mason University's Ilya Somin says Proposition 99 would actually block meaningful eminent domain reform. And environmentalists Graham Chisholm and Joel Reynolds explain why taking the middle road worked on the Tejon Ranch development.

The editorial board explains why the June 3 election for the 2nd Supervisorial District matters, and argues that  prosecutors are misusing a federal statute in their drive to prosecute Lori Drew for alleged online harassment of Megan Meiers on MySpace.

Today's letters page is devoted to reader reactions to the gay marriage ruling. San Diego's Charles Crawford looks ahead to November:

By being shortsighted and selfish, I fear that my fellow gay and lesbian brothers and sisters have handed our community a pyrrhic victory.... [I]n the most crucial election year in my lifetime, we have now unleashed the sleeping tiger on the right, and not only will we likely lose the constitutional battle to ban gay marriage, we have likely just handed John McCain California and the White House along with it.

Newsweek correspondent and author Michael Hastings knows too well that war is more than statistics:

While I was in Iraq covering the war for Newsweek for two years starting in 2005, the woman I planned to marry was murdered in Baghdad by insurgents on Jan. 17, 2007. Her name was Andi Parhamovich; she'd come to Iraq to work for the National Democratic Institute, an NGO....

We -- Andi, me, Jeff, Greg, Scott, Ferris -- all chose to go to Iraq, volunteers for our respective causes. We were under no illusions about the risks, though that's a glib way of putting it. I don't think anyone can fully grasp the risks until whoosh, wham, through the looking glass you crash on the way to the rehab center at Walter Reed or a funeral parlor in Ohio.

Iraq often gets treated by pundits, writers and politicians -- all those thoughtful cheerleaders turned war critics -- as an intellectual exercise. It's not.

Columnist Gregory Rodriguez reports that people will often ignore their self interest if they can get a fair deal. And New Republic assistant editor James Kirchick says South African President Thabo Mbeki shouldn't stand by as Robert Mugabe ruins Zimbabwe.

The editorial board says no on Prop. 98, yes on Prop. 99, and asks why phone customers should have to pay to keep their numbers unlisted.

On the letters page, Long Beach's Iris Ingram says to those who would ask Hillary Clinton to quit the race: "The primary season ends in June. So suck it up and stick it out."

Since I'm the resident thought-tormented Ron Paul fan on staff, I've taken a special interest in the Paul supporters who are objecting to the attention we've paid to the white-supremacist past of Paul-connected judicial candidate Bill Johnson.

Thanks, everybody, for commenting. Some clarifications are in order:

Commenter "Tracey," declares that Johnson is not the author of the so-called Pace Amendment. This is incorrect. Johnson confirmed in a phone call with our own Robert Greene that he is indeed the author of the Pace amendment and of the "James O. Pace" book Amendment to the Constitution.

Commenter "blakmira" calls us "lower than scum" for the "smear" on Paul in our editorial about the Johnson campaign, which noted that Johnson had affiliated himself with the Paul-for-president campaign; apparently our mentioning that was clear evidence of counter-rEVOLutionary tendencies. In any event, Paul himself appears to be taking the matter seriously enough that he has renounced his end of the affiliation. Here is an email we just received from Paul's congressional chief of staff Tom Lizardo:

Over the past several weeks, I have also been involved in assisting Dr Paul with the consideration of candidates who are seeking his endorsement for their campaigns.  We have gone through the process of setting up a method by which candidates are to be considered for such endorsements.  During that period, we have also received and reviewed requests from dozens of candidates.

Although Bill Johnson's name ended up on the endorsement list, he did not go through this process.  In light of this fact, and in light of the revelations regarding his past statements and associations, Dr Paul has retracted the endorsement and hopes that, in the future, the process that has been put into place will mitigate the likelihood of similar errors.

Several commenters claim that they know Bill Johnson and he couldn't possibly be a racist. We make no judgments on what Johnson believes in his heart, only on what he has publicly advocated. But Paul, whose attentiveness to such matters has not always been impressive, deserves credit for taking quick action in this case. The claim by another commenter that Johnson is part Japanese is also incorrect, though Johnson does speak fluent Japanese as a by-product of his LDS mission in the land of the Rising Sun. We can confirm that "Turning Japanese" by the Vapours remains one of the finest works of rock orientalism ever recorded.

Finally, a commenter at dailypaul.com claims that our staffer is the same Robert Greene who writes self-help books on "How to crush your competitor," "How to secure the corner office," "How to take over your supervisor's position" and "The 48 Laws of Power." I can confirm that Greene is not that person and that if he ever wrote a self-help book it would be about how you can become a better person by scrupulously reading the fine print of voter information packets in obscure municipal elections. Nor is he the Robert Greene who denounced Shakespeare in his "Greene's Groatsworth of Wit, bought with a million of Repentaunce." Moreover, Robert Greene confirms that he is a Stratfordian in good standing, though if pressed he would put Pericles, Prince of Tyre in the "disputed authorship" category.

Hope that clears things up.

John McCain is using Cinco de Mayo, the most American of Mexican holidays, to launch a Spanish-language version of his website. He's also agreed to attend the National Council of La Raza annual conference this summer, which has the usual suspects up in arms.

McCain will have to pull off an interesting balancing act as the general election nears: wooing crucial, increasingly Democratic-leaning Latino voters while roping in Republicans who favor tighter immigration policies. He got a bit of practice doing just that during Republican debates -- goaded by single-issue long-shots Duncan Hunter and Tom Tancredo, not to mention the back-and-forth between Mitt Romney and Mike Huckabee over who dared show compassion to immigrants.

But since last summer, when comprehensive immigration reform lost another round in Congress, McCain has moved further away from his original position, as expressed in a bill he co-sponsored with Sen. Edward Kennedy (D-Mass.). Now McCain emphasizes a security-first approach and he has said he wouldn't even vote for his original bill if it came up again in Congress (See The Times' McCain endorsement for the editorial board's take on that switch.)

And while it is pretty clear that a good number of Latino voters -- whether newly-registered or not -- don't like tough-on-immigration rhetoric, it's not clear whether having a Spanish-language website gets them all that excited. After all, most second-generation and almost all third-generation Latinos speak English. Symbolism does count for something, but it probably wouldn't compensate for an about-face on comprehensive immigration reform.

*Photo courtesy Bloomberg News.

Journalist and food critic Alice Feiring explores why California wines aren't what they used to be:

Forget "Eureka," the new state motto can well be: "Anything worth doing is worth overdoing." Today's California wines are overblown, over-alcoholed, over-oaked, overpriced and over-manipulated.

When I first stopped drinking the Left Coast, it was because I was offended by the overuse of wood, boring flavors and lack of structure. The wines, many of which had plenty of edge and personality, seemed neutered to me. I soon learned that the other part of the story was that an arsenal of technology was deployed to make them that way: yeast, enzymes, tannin, oak and acid, as well as over-extracting techniques, micro-oxygenation, dialysis and reverse osmosis.

Columnist Gregory Rodriguez calls out Barack Obama for flip-flopping on Rev. Jeremiah A Wright Jr. And Los Angeles City Employees Retirement System trustee Kelly Candaele says CalPERS should stick to being an "activist" investor.

The editorial board warns Angelenos that a racial separatist running for judge could win if they don't get out the vote. The board also checks in on trouble in the ex-Soviet republic of Georgia and thinks California should bring fairness to its school spending.

It just goes to show what can happen if you don't pay attention to judicial elections. Los Angeles voters could unwittingly end up electing white separatist Bill Johnson to the court. Vote-by-mail ballots are available Monday, so it's important for anyone planning to vote anytime soon to first read an April 29 Metropolitan News-Enterprise profile on Johnson. The story by editor Roger Grace exposes the candidate as the author of a proposed constitutional amendment to reserve U.S. citizenship exclusively to white people "of the European race."

Last month The Times endorsed James Bianco for the Los Angeles Superior Court seat, saying that  Bianco was "impressive as a Los Angeles Superior Court commissioner and would make an excellent judge." We didn't mention Johnson, his opponent, who ran for Congress in Arizona in 2006 on an anti-immigration platform; we simply focused on the fact that Bianco is the better choice.

I did note in a blog entry the previous month that Johnson helped circulate petitions for Carson minister Ronald C. Tan, whose petition campaign forced six Latino judges to be put on the ballot to face possible write-in opponents (none apparently have stepped forward).

Grace writes that Johnson wrote a 1989 book, under the name James O. Pace, called "Amendment to the Constitution," backing what became known as the Pace Amendment. Here it is, in part:

No person shall be a citizen of the United States unless he is a non-Hispanic white of the European race, in whom there is no ascertainable trace of Negro blood, nor more than one-eighth Mongolian, Asian, Asia Minor, Middle Eastern, Semitic, Near Eastern, American Indian, Malay or other non-European or non-white blood, provided that Hispanic whites, defined as anyone with an Hispanic ancestor, may be citizens if, in addition to meeting the aforesaid ascertainable trace and percentage tests, they are in appearance indistinguishable from Americans whose ancestral home is the British Isles or Northwestern Europe. Only citizens shall have the right and privilege to reside permanently in the United States.

This would likely come as news to Reverend Tan, the Filipino-American minister who got Johnson to circulate petitions to help him oust Latino judges — so Tan could try to get Filipinos elected. Tan earlier claimed not to know that Johnson was active in the Ron Paul for president campaign; here's something else for him to be surprised about.

The MetNews story also notes that Johnson ran for Congress in Wyoming 1989 under the name Daniel Johnson in a special election to replace Dick Cheney, who had been named secretary of defense in the administration of the first President Bush. Times stories from the 1980s connect attorney Daniel Johnson with the League of Pace Amendment Advocates and identify him as the author of the Pace amendment.

So here's a candidate for judge who espoused (and may still support) disenfranchisement and deportation of non-whites, and who ran for Congress from two different states, once under a different name, while maintaining his law practice in Los Angeles.

(Full disclosure: I worked for Grace at the Metropolitan News-Enterprise for 11 years. But I wish I'd gotten this story before he did.)

Could voters elect Johnson? Yes, they could, if they don't learn anything about the candidates. The MetNews story — and, I hope, our link to it — will help voters make wise choices.

And in case there was any doubt, we still support Bianco, now more vociferously than before.

The June 3 stealth primary actually starts Monday. That's when voters can pick up (and mark and send in) vote-by-mail ballots. They're often are still called "absentee" ballots, but unlike the old days, you can take care of business early without having to pretend that you won't be around on election day. True "absentee" ballots, for people who can't vote in the regular mail voting because of military or other commitments, began April 4. So hurry up.

Click here to apply for a mail-in ballot if you live in Los Angeles County. Of course, there are other ways to go; you could apply at the registrar-recorder's office in Norwalk, or you could send in one of those applications that you may get in the mail this weekend, courtesy of one of the campaigns with skin in the game.

Campaigns are counting on mailbox voters and will try to reach them with glossy slate cards and brochures starting -- well, it's every campaign's closely-guarded secret, but probably Saturday, with big spurts planned for every weekend in May. Very few people are expected to actually go to the polls next month, so the mailbox is where the action is -- and now is the time the action starts.

It wasn't supposed to be this way. This election was going to be the presidential primary, when a record number of Californians would go to the voting booth to very likely have the final say in whether Hillary Clinton or Barack Obama would be the Democratic nominee. But last year the Legislature decided to strip out the presidential portion of this election and put it on the earlier February 5 ballot -- so our vote would have more impact. Ironic, huh?

The rest of the June ballot goes forward: Proposition 98 to curb eminent domain and phase out rent control, Proposition 99 just on eminent domain, party primaries for state Assembly and Senate, and in Los Angeles county, elections for Superior Court judge, district attorney and county supervisor.

Click here to see the Times endorsements for Superior Court, and here to see our endorsements for district attorney and two of the three supervisorial contests. Endorsements in the other races are coming soon, and of course you shouldn't even dream of voting early until you get the benefit of our guidance. But suit yourself.

And click here for the latest on the June 3 election, the November 4 election, and every election in between.

UCLA graduate student and Chow Digest senior editor C. Thi Nguyen bemoans L.A. County's requirement that taco trucks move after one hour, and New York attorney Scott Horton analyzes UC Berkeley professor John Yoo's role in the Bush administration's stance on torture. Former Los Angeles mayor Richard Riordan hopes LAUSD will repair its relationship with charter schools, and Gregory Rodriguez scratches his head at Americans' insistence that politicians act like the average Joe:

Sure, high-ranking politicians of humble origins can lay at least some claim to being "common." But that's really a ruse. Because the best politicians wouldn't get as far as they do if they hadn't already successfully convinced large numbers of people that they were distinct from -- read: better than -- the rest of us.

And therein lies our dilemma. We hold to the belief that we are all equal, yet we yearn for distinctiveness for ourselves and those we choose to represent us. In a nation whose form of government exalts the illusion of uniformity among its citizens, we are collectively engaged in a struggle to be recognized as unique by our peers.

The editorial board publishes its endorsements for 17 seats on the Los Angeles Superior Court, and puts its money behind a House bill to force 401(k) managers to clarify the fees they charge "Jack and Jill Cubicle":

Unfortunately, as this newspaper detailed in a series of articles in 2006, many employees aren't being told how much of their nest egg is being frittered away on fees paid to the companies managing their 401(k)s. Buried in the fine print of incomprehensible forms or not disclosed at all, those fees can consume thousands of dollars over time. To address that problem, several lawmakers have introduced bills that would require mutual funds, insurers and other providers of retirement plans to make complete disclosures of their fees to employers and workers. 

Readers react to the Supreme Court's decision finding legal injections humane. Writes Joy Buckley, "State-sanctioned killing is barbaric, cruel and should be highly unusual. We should join the civilized countries of the world in eliminating it."

Like the city of L.A., Los Angeles County has a telephone tax that has been challenged in court. Like the city, which preserved its phone tax by taking it to voters on Feb. 5, the county might put its tax on the ballot. But not yet. This Tuesday is the Board of Supervisors' last chance to put something on the June 3 ballot, but county CEO Bill Fujioka said it's too early to decide how to proceed. That leaves a November vote or, perhaps, a court fight. Or the end of the tax.

If you want to look up the county's tax — and of course you do — click here, then click on Title 4, Revenue and Finance, then on Chapter 4.62, Utility User Tax, then — still with me? — on 4.62.060, Telephone user tax. It's a 5% tax on calls in unincorporated county areas. But the whole shebang, including the tax on electricity and other services, could be covered by the lawsuits.

The county is not doing well in court so far. In the Oronoz and Kaufman cases, a judge granted the plaintiffs' request that their suits be treated as class actions on behalf of anyone who was (they claim) improperly taxed. An appeals court affirmed that ruling on Jan. 24, so now the county is asking the state Supreme Court to reverse. There are likely still many months before the cases go to trial.

The city did better on the class action issue, convincing a judge to reject a class action. The plaintiffs against the city (in the Ardon and TracFone cases) are now appealing. Trial on the merits of the case is a long way off, but in theory the plaintiffs could win back any tax money they paid up to the time Proposition S was adopted.

Cities (and three other counties) up and down the state are in a similar fix, facing lawsuits challenging phone taxes. City councils and boards of supervisors could change the ways those taxes were calculated only until 1996, when California voters passed Proposition 218. Any tax changes made since then are suspect unless ratified by voters.

The Times editorial page endorsed Proposition S as in the best interests of the city and its residents, but not without reservations. We were put off by the campaign, which stressed the tax reduction from 10% to 9% — true enough — but glossed over the fact that the tax was broadened to include more types of calls. Those campaign tactics — trying to fool voters instead of being straightforward with them — made opposition to Proposition S perfectly understandable.

That's something the county may want to keep in mind if it eventually moves forward with a phone tax ballot measure.

By the way, another reason the county isn't putting its phone tax on the June ballot may be the fact that two supervisors — Mike Antonovich and Don Knabe — are up for re-election on the same day. Why remind voters that their supervisors take their money? Besides, neither Antonovich nor Knabe are fans of taxes.

And no, he's not running for president, people. But! He still has plenty to say about partisanship, rhetoric and business as usual. From today's NY Times:

Over the past year, I have been working to raise issues that are important to New Yorkers and all Americans — and to speak plainly about common sense solutions. Some of these solutions have traditionally been seen as Republican, while others have been seen as Democratic. As a businessman, I never believed that either party had all the answers and, as mayor, I have seen just how true that is....

More of the same won’t do, on the economy or any other issue. We need innovative ideas, bold action and courageous leadership. That’s not just empty rhetoric, and the idea that we have the ability to solve our toughest problems isn’t some pie-in-the-sky dream. In New York, working with leaders from both parties and mayors and governors from across the country, we’ve demonstrated that an independent approach really can produce progress on the most critical issues, including the economy, education, the environment, energy, infrastructure and crime.

I agree with Bloomberg, but it's a little anticlimatic. The title of his Op-Ed kind of says it all: "I'm Not Running for President, but ..." But what, yeronner? But we should still listen to what you have to say?

Granted, a Bloomberg presidential campaign wouldn't have garnered much support from either end of the political spectrum. Besides, there are plenty of people out there who aren't running (and some who aren't superdelegates, even) whose voices still seem to matter in the race. And since the independent mayor of New York has reserved the right to throw his support behind one the the candidates in the future, he could still play a role moving those key unaffiliated voters.

And perhaps removing himself from the contest does take the showboat factor out of the whole endeavor, so people (unlike me, apparently) may actually listen to what he has to say.

Not that he has any problem with third-party candidates, as he told AP a couple days ago:

This business of Ralph Nader being a spoiler — you know, in any three-way race, two of the three are going to be spoilers. Come on. Everybody's got a right to do it — you're not spoiling anything ... If people want to vote for you, let them vote for you, and why shouldn't they?

You tell 'em, Mike.

Editorial board ecommendations clobbered all competition during election week. Out endorsement win-loss results for this election are a solid middling, but our endorsement traffic ran the table. The only thing stopping a clean top-10 sweep by the ed board? More policy and politics from Joel Stein and Michael Kinsley and an unexpectedly strong showing by Philip L. Fradkin's look at the legacy of Wallace Stegner. The tape:

Barack Obama for Democratic nominee, by the editorial board
The real Reagan, by Michael Kinsley
John McCain for GOP nominee, by the editorial board
No on Proposition 92, by the editorial board
Yes on 94, 95, 96, and 97, by the editorial board
Perhaps a bit too stimulated, by Joel Stein
Yes on Proposition 93, by the editorial board
No on Proposition 91, by the editorial board
We recommend, by the editorial board
A classic, or a fraud? by Philip L. Fradkin

Oxford University professor Timothy Garton Ash sits back with a bowl of popcorn and enjoys the blockbuster campaign season, while Rosa Brooks rides the national mood swing toward idealism. Election law professor Richard L. Hasen weighs in on the ballot bubble trouble that decline-to-state voters faced, and cartoonist Lisa Benson looks over the one big fish Tsunami Tuesday left behind. If Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa leaves Los Angeles for Hillary Clinton, Patt Morrison nominates Rudy Giuliani for top dog:

What would Rudy bring to L.A.?

He's deliciously mean. Maybe Villaraigosa can deliver the political shiv with the best of them, but even when Giuliani smiles, he scares me. In L.A., where traffic flow is the yardstick of a leader's success, Giuliani will make us behave. If the sign says, "No parking 7 a.m. to 10 a.m.," the Scourge of Squeegee Men, the Avenging Angel of Times Square will tow your illegally parked car and ticket your butt. Not just here and there, not just now and then, but all over town, and every day.

The editorial board settles in for an extended, exciting campaign, and calls out Proposition S proponents on their methods. Finally, the board snarks at Assembly Speaker Fabian Nunez and Senate President Pro Tem Don Perata for failing to pass term-limits reform:

Voters don't like to be played for fools.... If you hadn't been so blatantly self-serving and hadn't given voters such good reasons to be angry with you, term-limits reform would have passed. The next generation of California lawmakers would have had more clout to say "no" to lobbyists and a long enough view to hammer out fixes for our chronic budget, healthcare, water resources, education and other problems.

Instead, California is left with the same broken system it has had for 18 years. As for you, you're termed out. Bye, now. Don't let the door hit you on the way out.

Readers share their post election buzz. Mark Donnelly writes, "Looks as if The Times' starry-eyed push for Obama had exactly the effect on California's voters I thought it would: none."

Ouch.

Asif Ali Zardari, husband of slain Pakistani leader Benazir Bhutto, calls for free elections and a U.N. investigation into his wife's murder, and Veronique de Rugy tears down President Bush's budget, billion by billion. Tim Rutten touts the generation gap as an antidote to identity politics, and cartoonist Signe Wilkinson watches America crawl by, dragging its military budget along. Meanwhile, journalist Kate Spicer chronicles her harrowing investigation into "the world of women who live on the fringes of an eating disorder":

The psychopathology of my immersion was intense and real; the more weight I lost, the more I wanted to lose. Progressing toward a physical ideal was empowering. London girls like myself -- but you can insert Paris, New York, L.A. or anywhere fashion and media have a fierce grip -- are especially prey to dieting culture. For ambitious perfectionists, being thin is the literal embodiment of success.

The editorial board celebrates the newfound civic enthusiasm in the 2008 presidential campaign:

The cynicism may be nearing an end ... huge turnout in many primary races, including the Super Tuesday contests in California and 23 other states, shows that the nation may finally have gotten over Watergate. As candidates from both parties relentlessly drive home the message that each will be an agent of change in Washington, voters have a glimmer of hope that they're telling the truth.

The board also warns the city not to close its doors as it makes plans to raise downtown density, and applauds Microsoft's bid for Yahoo as a chance to shake up the market.

Readers hail the city's law to require spaying and neutering of pets, though Peter Auerbach takes another view:

Although I agree with the need to control the animal population, I find this measure to be extreme. If all cats and dogs are spayed or neutered by the age of 4 months, where are the kittens and puppies of the future supposed to come from? Will out-of-area breeders be our only source? There are enough problems with puppy mills already. Let us try to reach a reasonable solution, not one so draconian.

During our own Republican endorsement campaign, I lobbied first for Rudy Giuliani and then for Mitt Romney, not merely hoping to kill the market for Matt Welch's book, but because I believe opposing The New York Times in all things takes precedence over all other concerns. So I'm the one who should be forthright, gracious and magnanimous and admit that the other Times just beat the pants off us in endorsement power in our own state.

Final score: Times east, two for two; Times west, one for two.

For what it's worth, we removed the candidates' collective and individual probabilities of winning as a factor in determining 2008's semi-finalists, and I call that a wise decision. Nor did my dream race (Richardson-Paul to Obama-Paul to Obama-Giuliani to Obama-Romney, which I think is a song by The Who) differ substantially from that of the board. Why did your dream race change if electability was not a factor? you may ask. I can reply only that we do not live in dreams.

We also attempted to be as forthright, gracious and magnanimous in building our endorsement cases, to think through the meaning of our words and to try to get your input, as well as or better than any paper published on any of the terran planets. We look forward to continuing to serve you in the exciting election year we expect. Thanks for tuning in to Opinion L.A. and the L.A. Times, and we welcome your thoughts.

Billionare philanthropist Eli Broad reveals his secret recipe for charter school success, Jonah Goldberg takes a philosophical turn on his way to Disneyland and cartoonist Tom Toles finds out why President Bush empathizes with homeowners facing foreclosure. SMITH co-editors Rachel Fershleiser and Larry Smith share a few responses to their challenge to write a six-word memoir:

Wasn't born a redhead; fixed that.   -- Andie Grace
Can't tonight, watching "Law & Order."   -- Rory Evans
Found true love, married someone else.   -- Bjorn Stromberg
Well, I thought it was funny.   -- Stephen Colbert
Took scenic route, got in late.   -- Will Blythe
Being a monk stunk. Better gay.   -- Bob Redman
Became my mother. Please shoot me.   -- Cynthia Kaplan
Was father, boys died, still sad.   -- Ronald Zalewski
New Jersey to California. Thank God.   -- Ayelet Waldman
It was embarrassing, so don't ask.   -- Alex Lindquist

The editorial board gives a recap of its Super Tuesday endorsements, and gets behind the Senate Finance Committee stimulus package. Crawling up the I-5, editorial writer Karin Klein shares a surprising story of a tomato that made it, against all odds:

You have to drive in the so-called fast lane toward downtown to see it, and at first I doubted my eyes. It's a straggly thing sprouting from the asphalt along the median barrier, within easy sight of the Commerce Casino. The spot is so inhospitable, even the weeds are stunted. Every week, nevertheless, the plant's once-green berries grew visibly larger and redder. There it sprawls, its species now unquestionable, at the wrong time of the year, with full eastern exposure, bearing a prolific load of red fruit.

Readers react to Attorney General Michael Mukasey's position on waterboarding. Norman Franz writes:

At least Mukasey is willing to admit that if he were a victim of waterboarding, it would be torture and therefore illegal. Congratulations, Mr. Mukasey, for placing yourself above any and all detainees who have been waterboarded, whether they deserved it or not.

Columnist Rosa Brooks says the Clinton two-fer might cost the campaign:

The problem for Hillary Clinton is that, as usual, she wants it both ways. She wants to be judged on her own merits and not be treated as Bill's Mini-Me. But she also wants to reap the benefits of Bill's popularity, and offers voters the reassuring suggestion that if there's a crisis while she's in the White House, there will be someone around who really does have executive branch experience -- namely, Bill -- to lend a hand.

But the Clintons are playing a dangerous game. The more they remind us of what we liked about Act I of the Bill and Hillary Show, the more they also remind us of what we hated.

Board of Equalization member Michelle Steel notes that California owes millions to small-business owners. Arizona State University's Erica Rosenberg argues that environmental groups shouldn't be so eager to collaborate and compromise on deals with Congress. Columnist Patt Morrison sees the light at the end of the George Bush tunnel.

The editorial board supports Proposition S, a city communications tax, and asks the California legislature to pass a pollution-fighting "feebate" on new cars.

Letter writers reflect on the 35th anniversary of Roe vs. Wade. Monrovia's Ellen Zunino writes, "if we truly thought life precious and valuable, impregnating a woman outside of the marriage bed would be a felony, and failing to support the woman and her fetus would be a 'special circumstance' crime."

Last time we posted your recommendations for the 2008 presidential campaign, we referred to it as positively the "last batch" of letters. So of course, here's the next installment. Manhattan Beach'e own Janie MacHarg doesn't mince words, with a subject line that reads: "Please Endorse Barack Obama." Her reasons:

Thank you for inviting your readership to submit opinions on your upcoming endorsements for the presidential primaries in California.  I am a 62 yr. old white female, who lives in Manhattan Beach.  I am the niece of a long-ago politician, Robert Y. Thornton, who served as the Attorney General of Oregon for 16 years, from 1953-1969.  When I was a young girl, my uncle taught me the paramount importance of honesty and integrity in a politician.  Although I voted for Bill Clinton in 1992 and 1996, and have admired Hillary Clinton in past times, I am now thoroughly disheartened by and disappointed in both Clintons.  My past admiration for Hillary has dissipated to the point of being almost non-existent, so great is my disgust for her willingness to twist and distort the meaning of Barack Obama's words and record.  It is worse than mis-representation; Bill and Hillary are both shamelessly telling bald-faced lies with straight faces.  I implore the Times editorial board to endorse Barack Obama as the Democratic presidential candidate. I do so for many reasons I won't enumerate here, but integrity and an ability to think intelligently about how to address old problems in new ways, particularly in the area of foreign policy, are high among them.  I think Sen. Patrick Leahy's endorsement of Sen. Obama said it best — we need Barack Obama because he is the person "who can reintroduce America to the world, and actually reintroduce America to ourselves."  Thank you for listening.

Columnist Jonah Goldberg describes his experience as a guest on "The Daily Show":

It started civilly enough, discussing my new book, "Liberal Fascism." But things got sufficiently testy that we spent nearly 20 minutes swearing and sparring, and only six minutes aired. The result was "choppy as hell," Stewart had to concede.

Largely left on the cutting-room floor were some important points that might have made my book seem a bit more nuanced....

Former Gov. Gray Davis throws his support behind Arnold Schwarzenegger's budget cuts. Dickinson College's Crispin Sartwell examines the twists and turns in presidential candidates' image. Frances Kissling and Kate Michelman remind us that it's not 1973, and pro-choicers have to take back the moral high ground.

The editorial board also marks the 35th anniversary of Roe vs. Wade, supports Propositions 94, 95, 96, and 97, and says declining record sales mean time for the industry to rethink its business model.

Readers react to President Bush's proposed stimulus package. L.A.'s Scott Kaye says it could be Bush's "most cynical proposal since his post-9/11 recommendation that we go shopping."

Columnist Gregory Rodriguez writes that Martin Luther King would be proud to see the 2008 presidential race:

Obama's life and work debunk the idea that his racial identity somehow effectively separates him from the majority. In his memoir, he recognizes that part of the work of the smaller community is to help redefine the broader national community. Ignoring narrow or defensive notions of racial pride, he sees no incongruity in being proudly African American and capably representing all Americans.

Nor has he felt the need to paint himself as "post-racial," or less black in any way, as he courts white voters.

But author Marcus Rediker points to something that would unsettle King, arguing that the U.S. has yet to properly atone for the slave trade. Lee "CultureGrrl" Rosenbaum says forget ownership, countries like Greece and Italy that can afford to share art wealth should.

The editorial board endorses in two contests: No on Proposition 91, and yes on Proposition 93. The board analyzes the presidential race and figures out which primaries are make-or-break ones for candidates.

Readers aren't happy with Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger's endorsement of a toll road through San Onofre State Park. Kurt Page of Laguna Niguel says, "Anyone who doesn't think that opening up pristine wilderness to development will ultimately increase gridlock just stands to make a buck from it."