It's getting to election time, and just like all the print publications, it's time to put out endorsements. Herewith are mine for a variety of Massachusetts races.

GOVERNOR and LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR - There are five choices here, and none of them are particularly overwhelming.

The one that you non-Mass folks have probably heard of is Republican Mitt Romney, who took over the Salt Lake Olympics when it was such a fiasco. Folks here like the job he did and drafted him into the Republican primary, forcing incumbent acting governor Jane Swift out without a second thought.

Romney's been pretty aggressive in the campaign, running on a reformist, "clean up the mess" line. Not that he's given many specifics as to where the cleaning will start. He's focused more on the short-comings of his main opponent, Democrat Shannon O'Brien.

And that's helped Romney, as it's drawn attention away from his lack of ideas and past as a corporate blood-sucker. His level of conservatism is also hard to pin down, as his stances on some of the litmus-test social issues, like abortion and gun control, have a murky quality to them.

Romney's running mate is Kerry Murphy Healey. She's window dressing (so to speak), an attempt to soften Romney and attract women. That she's likely more conservative than her possible boss (at least based on the one ad of her's I've seen) isn't well-known, as she's apparently not allowed to speak when campaining with him (which is the only time you see her).

The other main candidate is Democrat Shannon O'Brien, the state treasurer. I have deep distrust for that office, as in my lifetime (and probably before) it's been corrupt on the level of pro boxing. O'Brien's taken hits on her management of the state pension fund, and her "watchdog" role that may be closer to Romney's portrayal as a basset hound than she'd like. There's also the influence her lobbyist-husband may have had on her job performance. She can be aggressive, too, but has toned down a bit of late, trying perhaps to latch on to some undecided voters who are sick of the rhetoric.

Her running mate is Chris Gabrieli, an entrepraneur who spent a ton of money to defeat two opponents who had little money and no visibility during the primary. That he did this to gain the nod for a largely ceremonial post, and seemingly emptied his coffers enough to not put on the wall-to-wall media blitz in the general election, too, seems kind of stupid.

These two are running neck and neck. One kind of hopes they'll both strangle themselves on the finish line.

The three minor candidates aren't that fun. The Green Party put forth Jill Stein, a folk singer turned doctor who is clearly too understanding and prepared to hold high office. She offered statistics and analysis during the first debate with all five candidates- what was she thinking? Seriously, though, she's probably the most rational of the five candidates, which only further suggests she won't win.

Carla Howell represents the Libertarians, a party she joined after having trouble navigating the health care system and discovering that party's plan to overhaul things (which apparently involve putting the infirm on ice floes). Howell is always on message, never straying too far from her mantra of "small government is beautiful," not even to crack a smile, shake a hand, or otherwise appear human. Seriously, it's like Harry Browne put her together in a lab.

Finally, there's Barbara Johnson, the independent. A lawyer and activist in the fathers' rights movement, she's the loose cannon in the crowd. Her performance in the all-in debates was rambling and always over time. She suggested Howell get 30 days of psychiatric observation during the first debate (unkind, but perhaps not a bad idea). Her voice, raspy from years of chain smoking, reminds me of a shiksa Doris Grau.

Johnson has some ideas on issues that no one else is talking about. Unfortunately, most of them came out in the space of 30 seconds during the last debate. They included "aquaculture" and "fish farming," which makes me wonder how much money the Soylent Corporation has kicked into her campaign.

She's also bought ad time on the Internet. You may have seen her ads when you logged out of Yahoo! Mail. She's also the only one of the three minor candidates whose lieutenant governor I know anything about. He's a carpenter from Agawam. I only know that because I saw five seconds of the lieutenant governor candidate debate on Saturday (hey, ND-FSU was on).

So, who to pick? When Sarah and I had friends over on Saturday, we lamented the candidates at large and thought there should be a balanced ticket, one with a conservative governor to show a steady hand and a liberal lieutenant governor for balance. To that end:

Blogalicious endorses: Shawn DeVeau of Beverly and Matthew Harper-Nixon of Needham (write-in)

Other races and ballot questions:

TREASURER: There's a Democrat, a Republican, and a Green. Using the time honored selection method of "one potato, two potato":

Blogalicious endorses: James O'Keefe, Green Party

SECRETARY OF STATE: Bill Galvin, long time office-holder and Democratic hack, squares off against Jack E. Robinson of the GOP. You may remember Robinson from his hilarious (unintentional) Senate race against Teddy Kennedy. I'm less worried about Robinson holding this office than I am that Galvin will run for something important if he loses his sinecure. So:

Blogalicious endorses: William Galvin, Democrat

AUDITOR: Joe DiNucci is the only state auditor I remember. Not that the average person would remember the list of people who held the post, but DiNucci has a stranglehold on the office. There's a Libertarian and an independent in the crowd, but you can't argue against someone who is buried like a tick in the hide of state government. Not to mention I think DiNucci would have to go on unemployment if he lost; he may not know anything else but state auditing.

Blogalicious endorses: Joe DiNucci, Democrat

ATTORNEY GENERAL: Tom Reilly is the only guy running. Blogalicious endorses Reilly, for no good reason.

GOVERNOR'S COUNCIL: I have no idea what district I'm in. I don't even know what this body does. OK, according to the state web site, the Council acts on things like payments from the state treasury, gubenatorial appointments, and commutations and pardons.

These all seem like things an already existing body could do. I hope these folks don't pull in a full salary.

Blogalicious endorses: Write yourself in

US SENATE: John Kerry is running against Libertarian Michael Cloud. Kerry is probably going to run for President in 2004. I don't like the idea of him bailing to run for President, or neglecting his office to seek a higher one. But I don't like the idea of voting for this Cloud guy, either. Heck, I could use a promotion.

Blogalicious endorses: Mark Coen of Wellesley (write-in)

QUESTION 1: This question would abolish the state income tax. This is Carla Howell's brain-child, if you couldn't figure that out. As much as I don't like paying taxes, I also don't want to make us Baja New Hampshire.

Blogalicious endorses: a NO vote on Question 1

QUESTION 2: This question would eliminate bilingual education and replace it with English immersion. I don't know what I dislike more about this question: the racist and nativist overtones, or the likely underclass of people who will skip school because they don't know what anyone's saying and thus be undereducated, underemployed, and a bigger drain on the state (and if both this one and Question 1 passes, look out).

Blogalicious endorses: a NO vote on Question 2

QUESTION 3: This question seeks to repeal the Clean Election law that was enacted by ballot initiative. It's written asking if people support using taxpayer money to fund elections. It was put on the ballot by people who want the question to fail, giving the legislature (which has never liked the law) ammunition to overturn it. Warren Tolman may be the biggest thing the folks who wrote this question have going for them, as his negative ads using public money pissed people off. Still, I prefer this to the current system, where the money comes from God-knows where.

Blogalicious endorses: a YES vote on Question 3

QUESTION 4: This is Wellesley only. It's about establishing a fund that would go towards obtaining and preserving open space, historical resources, recreational land, and community housing. Creating a fund makes the town eligible for matching state funds. It'd come from a hike in property taxes. Considering I like open spaces, etc., and don't pay property tax (and work for an entity that doesn't, either):

Blogalicious endorses: a YES vote on Question 4

And while I don't get to vote on it, if you live in a district that has the question asking if you want to instruct your state rep to not vote for Tom Finneran for Speaker, Blogalicious endorses a YES vote.

Finally, there's a measure on the ballot in Holyoke asking if the town wants to legalize casino gambling. I'm not going to take a stand either way, but if it does pass, Governor DeVeau will probably move the state capital there.