postmark, needles

so, yeah, problematically, my vote was in the mail before all the newspaper frisson over this schwarzenneger business broke loose and before he came up with the brilliant rebutal of lashing out at substantive complaints by people who have declined his rim jobs. i sort of expected that i might regret the vote sometime in the future, but didn't think that feeling would set in quite this fast. even still, not that i want to stake out the right wing position in our sewing circle, but if he's serious about renegotiating terms with the casinos, who have appropriated the indians to create california gambling now in excess of las vegas gambling, that's key for voters serious about choosing a candidate who balances the budget so that it doesn't endanger social services even further and is key for voters who don't want someone who has hitherto told lies about the budget figures during a campaign season, eventually costing the state billions more in interest. this gambling issue has been one of this campaign's macguffins thus far, popping up as an obstacle for Bustamante in the over-blown fund-raising story line, but not attracting any of the press pull outs that have gone to the vexing california issues of steroid use in the 1970s or the nazi party membership of schwarzenneger's late, estranged dad--even though renogiating terms with the casinos could do more to balance the budget than any other campaign promise by any candidate thus far. So, if schwarzenneger is serious about getting something like connecticut's one-third take of gambling money, maybe I won't have to be completely bothered by my pick over no-fun Davis (who, incidentally, also has his own reported history of harassment in the workplace to the point where his 60-something secretary got state promises that she would no longer have to be alone in the same room with him.) ... jesus, i'm sounding like some elks club member sitting at the red leather club bar, wanting to explain everything about the last election ...