Opinion: In today’s pages: Endorsements, environment, and getting two Clintons for one vote
- Share via
This article was originally on a blog post platform and may be missing photos, graphics or links. See About archive blog posts.
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.’