Spinner wrote a terrific letter that got published in the Daily Bulletin (1-17-00), as follows:

"Prop. 10 was only a Reiner tax scheme.

The media's slobbering acceptance of Rob Reiner's Proposition 10 propaganda is infuriating.

We are not Big Tobacco. We are not Little Tobacco. We are the 20 percent of California taxpayers who have been saddled with 'Reiner's Jackpot,' and we're mad as hell and we're not going to take it any more.

Reiner's campaign to defeat Proposition 28 says we are funded and sponsored by Big Tobacco, but that's a lie. If we were, we'd have the money to combat the misinformation campaign he's waging.

If Reiner's plan is such a good one, then every taxpayer in California should be happy to pay for it. Which brings up a point: Who will pay for these 8,000 new bureaucrats when smoking is wiped out? If Proposition 10 is allowed to stand, no taxpayer in California is safe.

No one should be allowed to set up what is essentially a private entity with no government oversight and tax one segment of the population for the benefit of that entity or for the public at large.

That's wrong. And we the people - not Big Tobacco - we the people of California who have had a year to figure out just what Proposition 10 really is, are going to fix it so it doesn't happen again.

Even Charlton Heston, Reiner's friend and supporter, finally came to his senses and said that Proposition 10 is a 'costly fraud,' and a 'tax behemoth that creates a bureaucracy of social engineers free to squander a bonanza of revenue with unsupervised abandon.' He's right.

A yes vote on Proposition 28 will put the taxing power back in the hands of our elected representatives where it belongs, restore the California Constitution, and tell Reiner and his Hollywood cronies that we can raise our own children without their help."

Signed: M.L. HERRIN ["Spinner"]

Seems that Ned Roscoe attended one of Reiner's meetings/press conferences and the Meathead went off on him AND a staffer standing next to him.

Part of Roscoe's letter to Reiner:

"First, you should have apologized to the campaign staffer for cussing him out in front of me. You were bellowing. Your tone
of voice was full of rage. You were unreasonable.

"Second, when I told you we should be nicer to each other, you came out of left field when you started shouting about how "You want to take my money." Then, when I pointed out that it's not your money, that the government has the money and it came from taxpayers and how you're just the commissioner, you started ranting about how I want to 'kill children.'"

Read the whole thing at http://voteprop28.com/reiner_letter_4.html

Wonder why the press didn't cover this little temper tantrum?

Wow! Reiner must be losing it. Give him a little more rope and he'll hang himself with that kind of temper tantrum. Poor baby, somebody wants to take "his" money? I guess he forgot that he got that money by robbing California smokers.

Thanks so much for circulating that letter, Spinner!

By the way, what are the "secret documents" that Roscoe claims Reiner is "sitting on for fear the news will leak out"? Does anyone know?

Martha

Oooh! It does sound like Mr. Big Shot thinks he's beyond having to be civilized to other people. As a director and ex-TV star, he apparently believes he's entitled to behave any way he chooses and to have public temper tantrums.

Yes, one DOES wonder what secrets he's hiding. Enquiring minds want to know.

HIS money? What overweening gall! Instead, of actually using his own money Mr. Celebrity/Rich Guy takes money from Average Joes and Jills in California to use for his own political agenda.

And does he sound like a guy who gives a rat's bottom about children or anyone else except himself and his own power trip?

Wanda,
I'm sure you meant your last question as a rhetorical one - but I'll answer it anyway.

H**L NO.

BTW - Did I make myself clear enough (LOL)

We all occassionally have to find a way to laugh, because it is so infrequent we have the chance.

Sorry for being flip - it's been one of those days!

Gabrielle

Martha, thanks for the compliment; another one will be published within a week in the Desert Sun. I've e-mailed all the conservative radio hosts and TV stations that have even mentioned Prop 28, trying to get people to see that there is another side than the Meathead's. Today I stopped and spoke with a group of smokers outside Wal-Mart. Eight people, and not one of them even knew there was an effort to repeal Prop 10. It's just a tad discouragin'.

You're welcome, Spinner, and thanks for the good news that you've got another one coming up in the Desert Sun!

I know it's discouraging that of the eight smokers you talked to not one of them knew about Prop 28. But they do now thanks to you and people like Marty for exposing that bully Reiner. Word spreads, and don't you know that those smokers are spreading it.

The letter I wrote with the "moralist's" view was printed in the Antelope Valley Press today 2/11/00. They gave it the title, "Hasn't the state 'extorted' enough from smokers?".

I was right about "moralists". They DO respond better to "moralist" language. They don't respond well to "rights".

With respect to repealing Prop 10--I'll talk in their language. I'm not going to argue whether or not smokers are "addicted". It's a waste of time.

I'll give them the language they want: "Assuming nicotine is a drug, then Prop 10 money is "drug money", and I don't know any kid who got a good start in life with drug money."

Simple message. Short and sweet. It's working in the Antelope Valley.

Rebecca,
Whatever works, go for it! Don't forget, though, that these are the same people who think asset forfeiture is a good thing. There are as many arguments as there are people who hold opinions...I'll use anything that gets the point across.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Spinner:
Rebecca,
Whatever works, go for it! Don't forget, though, that these are the same people who think asset forfeiture is a good thing. There are as many arguments as there are people who hold opinions...I'll use anything that gets the point across.

---

Spinner,

Asset forfeiture "is a good thing for 'guilty' people", Spin! When the conversation gets turned around like this, suddenly asset forfeiture is in question too! You'd be surprised how many people (a whole classroom full of pro-Prop 10-about 60 moralists) got really quiet when I turned their logic upside down like this. Suddenly THEY were the "sinners".

I bet Jesus (not to get religious anything) really got to his accusers many times doing just what I'm doing. No wonder they crucified him!

Anyway--like I said, when these people were set to the task of realizing their own logic was working against them--the meeting drew to a close really fast! You know that chick from the Tuolumne County supervisor's office, Laurie Sylwester who blew it big time? That's the same effect that turning their logic upside down had on the Los Angeles group! I mean--there was nothing--absolutely nothing they could argue after that. Yes, they had to admit this tax is extortion and they are in fact the "extortionists" (big sinner there!) And they are using extortioned drug money to "save the children", and .... well... I ask again; "When did extortioned drug money ever give a kid a good start in life!"

They can't fight that. They don't even try. And when they do finally try to have some come back--it all comes out like Laurie Sylwester's "nervous breakdown".

Is it any wonder then, that these people would question "asset forfeiture"--especially when it's their ass--ets (tee-hee-hee) in question?? (Couldn't resist!!!)

Today the San Francisco Chronicle's and San Francisco Examiner's opinion pages contained a paid advertisement from Philip Morris. The message of the ad was that the company has no opinion on Proposition 28 and that it won't support or oppose it. The company's reason is that although it opposed Proposition 10, which was an initiative regarding taxation, Prop 28 is an initiative that will decide the fate of some state programs and is not the business of PM.

My first impulse was to chuckle angrily at another betrayal but then I had to laugh with PM at what might be a clever joke on the anti-tobacco crowd. The same papers a few weeks ago contained tearful ads from some phony anti-smoking group begging PM to stay out of the Prop 28 fight.

The crybabies got their way today. I'm betting that the anti's are getting dizzy trying to figure out how to damn Philip Morris for doing exactly as they begged while simultaneously delivering its message that Prop 10 is unfair taxation to all the state's major dailies. What would make the anti's dilemma even more precious is if PM would take its message of neutrality to television.

Saw RR on the Martin Short. There was no one with rebuttal.