I woke up this New Year's morning and the Davis Vanguard wouldn't load. I thought God had smiled down upon me and Davis and our civic nightmare was over — The Davis Vanguard was GONE!!!
But a couple of hours later it loaded again. Shit.
God fails again.
So I would wish you all a Happy New Year, but why?
But is there hope? I dunno, I got some letter from an anonymous sender referencing articles in the "California Globe" from October 2021 and April 2022. Seriously, I don't know who sent it to me, but they knew my mailing address. The article they referenced seems to refer to:
New IRS Complaint Against Non-Profit Davis Vanguard News Service
By Katy Grimes, October 22, 2021 3:35 pm
New IRS Complaint Against Non-Profit Davis Vanguard News Service
AND . . .
Attorney Says Non-Profit Davis Vanguard News Service ‘Continues to Violate’ Despite IRS Complaint
By Katy Grimes, April 22, 2022 10:33 am
Attorney Says Non-Profit Davis Vanguard News Service ‘Continues to Violate’ Despite IRS Complaint
Each is subtitled: "It is unfair and illegal for the Vanguard to receive tax-free status and revenue to develop a website and then use that website to campaign for/against certain candidate". The cover letter for the anonymous letter has just one sentence in a sea of white: "Why Isn't Anyone Reporting on This?"
So what the hell is this? Doesn't the attorney so-named know that unless someone actually sues and wins, or the IRS takes action, there is no determination of legality? And doesn't the sender realize that someone named Katy Grimes is, indeed, reporting on this — so the assertion that no one is reporting on this is refuted on the next page. But maybe they mean — in Davis?
And then it occurred to me, the letter wasn't anonymously sent: maybe there was no sender. No human sender. The letter may have been 'immaculately sent', if you will. Yes, God Almighty Its-Self has chosen me to post this information on Al's Corner!!! God has chosen ME to Save Davis!!!
God, I'm honored. I will obey.
Maybe it will be a half-decent 2023 after all 😐
Davisite 
Comments
95 responses to “Welcome to Al’s Corner – “Pouring Gasoline on the Dumpster Fire of Davis Politics” – January 2023”
Hmm, the plot thickens. I received snail mail like this, too, except mine just had the headline from April 2022, printed out on a single sheet. There was a second sheet, asking why the Davisite didn’t cover the issue. There was also an envelope with the return address as a PO Box…. the Vanguard’s PO Box. All very mysterious.
For what it’s worth, the Davisite has covered some similar issues before, in 2018:
https://www.davisite.org/2018/07/complaint-filed-against-vanguard-non-profit-.html
https://www.davisite.org/2018/07/irs-complaint-against-vanguard.html
https://www.davisite.org/2018/07/vanguard-irs-complaint-evidence.html
and 2019:
https://www.davisite.org/2019/05/davis-vanguard-irs-disclosure-problem.html
https://www.davisite.org/2019/05/davis-vanguard-irs-disclosure-problem-1.html
I also can’t help but note that a recent post by the Vanguard basically admits that it interferes/campaigns for particular candidates:
https://www.davisvanguard.org/2022/12/vanguard-making-an-impact-in-2022-help-us-continue-in-2023/
Quoting the article:
One success story, however, was Pamela Price in Alameda County, who became the first Black Elected DA in the county that was a birthplace of the Black Panthers movement.
She will be sworn in next week, completing an epic journey not only for her, but her community.
Recently, she credited the reporting of the Vanguard—which was substantial in that race—with helping her connect with her voters and provide positive and informative coverage of a vital race.
“During my campaign for Alameda County District Attorney there were not many media outlets that covered the detailed nuances of the race like Vanguard Media did. In fact, David and the Vanguard covered key endorsements and events and pivotal debates and discussions,” Pamela Price said.
She added, “Vanguard media kept the DA’s race front and center in the voters’ minds. Their dedication to highlighting progressive change in criminal justice was a definitive element in the success of the campaign.”
Well, it’s “official”.
There’s more commenting energy on the Davisite these days, then there is on the Vanguard.
Maybe they’ve finally just insulted too many people (or allowed that to occur).
Or, maybe the articles themselves are simply too repetitive (in regard to local issues, at least).
And of course, one of the few commenters on there has recently “moved beyond” commenting at all, sad to say. (I hope I’m not still doing so on my way out – which hopefully won’t be for some time.)
In any case, my final words will likely be something to the effect that there “is no housing shortage”. (Certainly, I won’t be needing any housing at that point, though I’m considering having it buried with me.)
RM say: Hmm, the plot thickens. I received snail mail like this, too, except mine just had the headline from April 2022, printed out on a single sheet. There was a second sheet, asking why the Davisite didn’t cover the issue. There was also an envelope with the return address as a PO Box…. the Vanguard’s PO Box. All very mysterious.
Say WHAT? That was the Vanguard’s PO Box? I think I threw the envelope out. Yes, I got the same sheet with April 2022 – but CA Globe page search revealed both articles.
I’m sure there are people out there who think we’re making this up, as Lord knows I have told many an outrageous yarn in digital print 😐 But no, some mysterious person is mailing out anonymous anti-Vanguard snail mails to select parties, apparently appropriating the Vanguard PO Box.
This goes to show there isn’t some organized conspiracy against the Davis Vanguard by a small group of individuals. Rather, I think this goes to show the depth and breadth of loathing there is in this town towards the Davis Vanguard. Or, maybe it goes to shows there are many small, disorganized conspiracies against the Davis Vanguard 😐
RO say: “There’s more commenting energy on the Davisite these days, then there is on the Vanguard. Maybe they’ve finally just insulted too many people (or allowed that to occur).”
The energy for giving money has apparently lost all steam as well, a true tell of (lack of ) support. For their “Year End Campaign” they raised $830 dollars out of a $26,736 oddly-specific goal, or 3%.
I feel sorry for the people who gave any part of that $830 towards that spectacularly failed goal.
No I don’t. I was lying 😐
AM writes: Say WHAT? That was the Vanguard’s PO Box? I think I threw the envelope out. Yes, I got the same sheet with April 2022 – but CA Globe page search revealed both articles.
Ah, ok, it makes more sense that we would have gotten the same thing.
I’m sure there are people out there who think we’re making this up,
I had the same thought, which is why I didn’t post about it — but I am glad that you did.
as Lord knows I have told many an outrageous yarn in digital print 😐 But no, some mysterious person is mailing out anonymous anti-Vanguard snail mails to select parties, apparently appropriating the Vanguard PO Box.
Department of You Just Can’t Make This Shit Up
This goes to show there isn’t some organized conspiracy against the Davis Vanguard by a small group of individuals. Rather, I think this goes to show the depth and breadth of loathing there is in this town towards the Davis Vanguard. Or, maybe it goes to shows there are many small, disorganized conspiracies against the Davis Vanguard 😐
If only this person had sent us an anonymous article to post, we could post that! Anonymous person, if you are reading, we can make that happen.
SUBJECT: “Commentary: The Good and Bad of the Storms; But the Long Range Is Not Looking Great” (Some blog based in Davis, dateline today. I mean date today)
Don’t quit your day job to become a meteorologist. That’s the study of meteors.
On the one hand, “Utility companies can be some of the biggest beneficiaries of climate action, and thus some of its most powerful supporters.
Um, you mean giving billions in subsidy to giant corporations makes them say: ‘Yes, yes, give me more!’ ? Yeah, welcome to America.
The campaign by climate activists to “electrify everything” — including cars, trucks, home heating systems and kitchen stoves — would create loads of business for electric utilities.
And not necessarily do a whole lot to lessen the carbon footprint. But as long as ‘electric’ means ‘clean’ go ahead with the delusion.
There’s a reason they went to bat for the Inflation Reduction Act.”
You mean the ‘Green New Deal’ that got named the ‘Inflation Reduction Act’ ?
In short, climate change itself will make it harder to solve climate change.
The above sort of brilliant observation is why I read the Davis Vanguard. And laugh my arse off.
“There’s growing excitement in the energy world for green hydrogen”
There is no such thing. Hydrogen is clear (note the Hindenburg explosion was not clear, but that’s another story). It is also as green as the electric grid that creates it, minus the loss due to the mode conversion, minus transport energy.
There are also land-use conflicts, as “energy companies seek to build thousands of solar, wind and battery facilities across the country, more of those projects are facing public pushback.
As well those projects should face pushback.
or conservationists who don’t want to see wildlife habitat destroyed,
Pray tell, those selfish conservationists!!!
“it’s becoming increasingly difficult to build renewable energy infrastructure without first overcoming local opposition.”
Kind of like . . . housing!!! It’s a crisis!!! So, burrowing owls and other wildlife, kiss your asses goodby! The new American left doesn’t give a fuck about you: they would rather team up with Senator Weiner and evil developers (not that all developers are evil) and mow over endangered species to build more housing to lower their rent and end homelessness! Hallelujah!
He ends on a less bad note:
How about using less bad English?
“not every year will be hell.”
Good to know.
My unfortunate takeaway however is less sanguine.
Let me guess. It’s a crisis.
We haven’t taken this crisis seriously enough.
Ah-HA! . . . (am I not taking this seriously enough :-|?)
Part of it is the slow boil phenomenon. We are in extremely hot water now, but it’s happened slowly enough that the progression has been undetectable and it’s getting to be too late.
He’s so overused this metaphor, he doesn’t even mention the frog anymore.
Doom may not be inevitable, but unless we act soon, it will be.
Define “we”. And, yes, doom is inevitable. Deal with it.
I recommend listening to a lot of doom metal.
Well, it’s crisis. Housing is a crisis. Climate is a crisis. The criminal justice system is in crisis. Why are all these things in crisis? Because a crisis was declared.
So I’m declaring a crisis: ” The Davis Vanguard Crisis”. We in Davis have a Vanguard crisis. Because I said so.
pardon the overuse of italics above. That isn’t how it is supposed to look. The crappy software is at fault. I coded it right.
“Climate is a crisis.”
When it doesn’t rain it’s a crisis, When it does rain it’s a crisis. When it doesn’t snow it’s a crisis. When it does snow it’s a crisis. When it’s hot it’s a crisis. When it’s cold it’s a crisis.
My head is spinning.
AM, you missed a couple of /s. I fixed it for you.
KO, the 20-year is part of climate change.
The Pineapple-Bomb Express Cyclone tomorrow is part of climate change.
It’s true.
It’s climate. It changes.
Always has.
But drought or downpour, it’s a crisis. A climate change crisis.
When we call it that.
And housing. It’s a crisis. When we call it that.
And criminal justice. It’s a crisis. When we call it that.
And the Vanguard’s 403(c) problem with the IRS. It’s a crisis.
Well, one can dream 😐
Several, hundreds, thousands, can dream
SUBJECT: “Critics Complain That the Sky Is Falling Even As We Fall Well Short of Our Housing Needs” January 6, 2023 Mavis Blanguard
Quote-eth David M. Greenwald Executive Editor: “California is facing a multipronged crisis [#ominousmusic#]—housing, affordable housing and homelessness.”
Hey, R.O., looks like the boy is no longer just crying wolf (“crisis”) because no one was listening to his cries. In order to amp up the volume, the boy is now crying multipronged wolf. Will anyone listen now? Do you hear the cry, R.O. ?
same article, same blog, same executive director . . . “Elias and other critics offer very little in the way of solutions, even as they cry that the sky is falling.”
So there person crying three-pronged wolf crisis is criticizing the critics for crying that the sky is falling. Such constructive conversation 😐
Big wheel spin and spin . . . or was it the little wheel that did that?
Yes Alan, I also found it hilarious that the person who calls everything a crisis is complaining that someone else is doing the same thing.
Alan: I did hear the “cry”, and responded to it.
Couldn’t resist, though I suspect I’ll regret it (one way or another).
The Davis Vanguard has multipronged federal nonprofit law violations!:
1) violates the absolute ban on any electioneering by publishing support/opposition for specific candidates
2) violates the ban on “substantial” lobbying activity on ballot measures
3) violations for not paying unrelated business income tax (UBIT) for its advertising revenue
4) million labor law violations for its unpaid internships (because interns are producing the primary work product of the organization—its articles—with only minimal oversight and training). Its business model is a sham and exploitative: it relies on free labor for its work product. And even with that, it can’t support itself sustainably: witness the recent move to rampant pop-up ads and multiple rounds of begging for money.
The Davis Vanguard has multipronged federal nonprofit law violations!
That’s nice, but is anyone going to DO anything about it? [Serious Question]
Alan M: I believe it’s been previously-reported to the IRS, who (apparently) did nothing about it. (At least, nothing that’s been publicly-acknowledged, nor did it apparently impact how the Vanguard subsequently operates.)
It’s an issue that’s been reported on here, previously (particularly in regard to candidates for DA races).
RO: I’m aware of all that.
My question is: Is anyone going to DO anything about it?
Well, you might recall that Rik got his foot stuck in the door at the Vanguard’s office (while David tried to close it), awhile back.
Related to the effort to ensure that the Vanguard posts its IRS filings in a publicly-available manner.
Which was successful, actually.
And presumably, the only “casualty” was Rik’s foot – and not a serious casualty at that.
🙂
I know nothing of the ‘foot incident’ of which you refer. Is this documented in an old Davisite story or something?
Alan – here’s the “foot incident” article. (Next time, I’d recommend using a fake foot in the doorway – as Daffy Duck once did.)
https://www.davisite.org/2019/05/davis-vanguard-irs-disclosure-problem.html
Interestingly-enough, it appears that the Vanguard hasn’t been posting its IRS filings, lately.
Perhaps it’s time for another “foot in the door” visit?
https://www.davisvanguard.org/about-us/irs-filings/
RO: “Perhaps it’s time for another “foot in the door” visit?”
I’ll volunteer my foot. Though it won’t end up in a door.
No telling where it may end up.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EAgDCMt8Q0A
RO – read link to Davisite article; I didn’t know about “Foot-Stuck-In-Door Gate”. That whole incident really sucks donkey balls 😐
Well, the Vanguard is back at it again (regarding not posting comments, for no discernible reason). While also allowing a comment from Walter Shwe, encouraging me (out of the blue) to “leave California”. (The Vanguard posted one of my responses to that, but not the other.)
Here’s my second attempt to post a comment in a different article. Again, apparently not posted:
Ron O January 7, 2023 at 3:03 pm
Your comment is awaiting moderation.
I responded to this previously, but didn’t bother saving the comment (as I normally do). The reason being I didn’t expect that it wouldn’t be posted.
I’ll try to rewrite it, here.
Putting kids on hormone blockers, for example, is a “self-fulfilling prophecy” in regard to the first steps toward sex reassignment surgery.
Prior to that, encouraging a delusion is also a step toward that result.
Again, this is a massive change (including public funding of so-called “gender affirming health care”).
If it was actually “gender-affirming”, it would enhance the sex characteristics that individuals were born with.
There is no such thing as “gender” that is separate from biological sex. Again, that’s a social construct (even noted in the link I provided).
SUBJECT: “CEQA Abuse Is a Big Problem for California Housing”
So if I am to believe the comments in the David’s Vanguard this morning:
• Building market rate housing increases housing costs.
• Building market rate housing decreases housing costs.
So useful. Pick a team, plug your ears, and yell, “LA LA LA LA LA LA !”
Alan: The only thing that we “should” believe is that Emendorf would probably be fired (or otherwise disciplined) for saying something like the following if he worked anywhere other than a university. (At least, not while a reference to his title/employer is included in the quote.)
UC Davis law professor Chris Elmendorf tweeted: “The court’s reasoning is devastating ammunition for racist white homeowners who would leverage CEQA to keep poor people and minorities out of their neighborhoods.”
And since the article references a “tweet”, Emendorf’s Twitter page shows that he’s a “denizen” of San Francisco, and commutes to UCD. How is it that he lives in a more-expensive locale, but apparently commutes to a less-expensive locale, some 100 miles from his home? (Both of which are overwhelmingly “white”, while he simultaneously labels others as “racist”?)
https://twitter.com/cselmendorf?lang=en
Could it be that he possibly enjoys rent control, in that more-expensive locale? Or is already a homeowner, there?
(The Vanguard refused to post a similar comment without explanation.)
What the hell is a ‘denizen’ ??? I’d look it up, but instead I’ll just reject the use of fancy words to cloud reality.
(The Vanguard refused to post a similar comment without explanation.)
I’ll explain it: those who moderate the Vanguard comments section are first-amendment-shatting-upon arseholes.
You know your words and your views are ‘triggering’, right? 😐
I’d consider them, ‘part of the conversation’. But better to shut down ‘unsafe views’ for their delicate readership who just couldn’t handle it.
SUBJECT: “CEQA Abuse Is a Big Problem for California Housing”
DV quoted Dan Walters who quoted our pal Chris Elmendorf:
“The court’s reasoning is devastating ammunition for racist white homeowners who would leverage CEQA to keep poor people and minorities out of their neighborhoods.”
I am amazed that Dan Walters is quoting these racist comments by Chris Elmendorf. I say racist because using a term such as ‘white’ is a smear on the entire white ‘race’ — I hesitate to use the term myself — maybe the ‘white appearing’. By making such a sweeping statement, those without power or money — ‘the white appearing poor’ are also smeared. That’s one of the great problems with racism no matter which way it goes on the wealth and power scale in averages and generalizations. This is the politics of envy, and don’t forget that was one tool that Hitler used to smear the Jews, because some Jews were indeed the bankers and the jewelers . . . but others who were dirt poor also got the envy-hate that over time led to genocide.
I also reject this racist language used by Elemendorf because it is inaccurate. As an example, the modest neighborhood I grew up in on the Peninsula is now a desirable neighborhood adjacent to Silicon Valley. When I was kid, there were two Asian-appearing families out of about 35 houses. I visited for a block party recently (a long-standing tradition), and about 3/4 of the residents of that block are Asian-appearing. I was also pleased to see a black-appearing family had recently moved-in. The last white-appearing original family sold their house last year to an Asian-appearing family. Original to that street, not the original native people.
I hate using all this race/skin-color language, but Elmendorf started it!
Over the last few years, forces have been trying to house so-called homeless people in their cars in nearby church parking lots, and some churches are considering dense housing on their lots adjacent to the current homes. I could tell the residents of the neighborhood were completely unaware of woke-progressive-housing&homeless-advocate politics, so I gave them a crash-course on Zoom of what they would face based on my experience with Trackside and other Davis issues.
It was shocking (and darkly humorous) to sit in on group Zooms with the city and ‘city citizens’ and watch white-appearing ‘homeless advocates’ and ‘housing advocates’ say absolutely vile things about the Asian-appearing current residents of my old neighborhood. And if the black-appearing neighbors were on the call (they hadn’t moved in yet), would the advocates have been so rude and condescending to that family as they were to the Asian-appearing families? Not surprisingly, some of these ‘citizens’ we identified as working for non-profits that were paid by cities for so-called homeless services and owed their jobs to this government money. Part of the Homeless-Industrial Complex.
Point is, this isn’t about race, it’s about wealth. Many white-appearing families have been driven out of these neighborhoods by wealthier Asian-appearing families. Does that mean all Asian-appearing people are wealthy? Hardly! Does that mean all white-appearing people are wealthy? Hardly. Yes, statistically/overall some ‘appearing/identifying’ groups are far wealthier than others, and yes, much of that based on racist practices and laws.
But what if Chris Elmendorf had instead stated something a bit closer to the truth (but still vile in my view) by adding two words: ‘The court’s reasoning is devastating ammunition for racist white and Asian homeowners who would leverage CEQA to keep poor people and minorities out of their neighborhoods.’ I would imagine there would be calls of racism. But just smearing the white-appearing, that’s OK these days.
Gee, that’s swell 😐
“using the court’s statistical-associations logic, white homeowners could argue that CEQA requires affordable housing developers to analyze and mitigate putative ‘gun violence impacts’ from any lower-income housing project in an affluent neighborhood. The homeowners would point to statistics showing that poor people, and African Americans and Hispanics, are statistically more likely than affluent people and whites to be victims of gun violence.”
‘The homeowners would point . . . ‘, ‘ white homeowners could argue’ ? Seriously, would they now? . . . or is that in Elmendorf’s dreams . . . similar to the government dynamited the Twin Towers on 9/11/2001? And . . . seriously, does anyone follow the logic of this scenario? Because if you do, please explain it to me — and tell me if you actually believe ‘white homeowners’ would indeed do what Elmendorf claims they could/would.
Alan: The primary definition of “denizen” is “resident” of. (I had to look it up myself to confirm, as well.)
Quote from your comment: “Point is, this isn’t about race, it’s about wealth.”
True – if it was actually about wealth, we might also examine the salary and benefits provided to university professors living in one of the wealthiest, “whitest” cities on earth who claim (referencing their titles) that others are racist. (While as you noted, also ignoring Asians – since it doesn’t fit their narrative.)
But the truly wealthy (e.g, underlying business/development interests) don’t even (directly) comment in articles/blogs. Instead, they let the Elmendorf(s), Vanguard(s), YIMBYs and political stooges they support declare “war” on existing residents (on their behalf). And their latest “tool” is to label those existing residents as “racists”.
Personally, I think that the effectiveness of labeling others as “racist” is increasingly-waning. They’re going to have to come up with something else, pretty soon.
Quote from Alan M:
“You know your words and your views are ‘triggering’, right? 😐
I’d consider them, ‘part of the conversation’. But better to shut down ‘unsafe views’ for their delicate readership who just couldn’t handle it.”
I’m pretty sure that you’re misunderstanding the reason that some comments aren’t allowed. That is, unless you believe that folks like Richard McCann and Walter Shwe are “too sensitive” (and “kind-hearted”) to hear them. (Not very many other commenters left on there.)
It’s more likely that they simply want to control/shut down challenges. It’s pretty obvious when you observe what “is” allowed, vs. what “isn’t”.
I would say they get a psychotic adrenaline rush from the power of cutting off the speech of evil people such as yours truly.
MW: “I come here to the Vanguard so infrequently that I must have missed your posts discussing them and providing links.”
You and everyone else, MW.
SUBJECT: “Some Concerned Newsom Didn’t Budget Enough for Housing, Homeless” (David Vanguard, Too Day)
Some eat their own feces (autocoprophagy). What is your point?
There is never an unlimited about of money for Affordable housing.
Any Affordable housing funds that are pursued (and used) in Davis are then not available for other cities. (Where the need might be even greater.)
Never could understand those who believe Davis is an island regarding issues such as this. (Well, unless you view the causeway right now, I assume.)
We are also an island for wood burning, and sacrificing our natural gas stoves. A blue island in a red sea (the red sea extends northward to the State of Jefferson, the southern border of which is not far!!!). There are some very large blue islands coastward, however 😐
Today’s Vanguard story:
“Sunday Commentary: Is the Council Out of Touch with the Broader Davis Community?”
I think a better title might be:
ls the Vanguard Out of Touch with the Broader Davis Community?
SUBJECT: “Sunday Commentary: Is the Council Out of Touch with the Broader Davis Community?” [2022-01-15 DG’s DV]
if you look at the council, they tend to be in the large moderate bloc of voters on the issue of housing.
Say WHAT ? 😐
On the one hand, they all have supported Measure J’s continuation and the notion of the voters having the final say on housing.
Measure has 83% of vote. Politicians support measure. Whodathunkit?
On the other hand, they have not been on the extreme side of the growth issue to oppose most projects. That largely puts the council in this broad group in the middle – they aren’t on the extreme slow growth side,
True. So middle-ish they be. Amazing powers of observation.
but they aren’t on the extreme pro-housing side that is willing to shelve Measure J.
They are politicians who would not go against what 83% of the community voted for and commit political suicide. And yet, to flip it, why isn’t the observer, who is on the extreme pro-housing side (concluded via my humble powers of observation) willing to scrap Measure J. And why is yours truly, who is not on the extreme pro-housing side, quite willing to scrap Measure J? Riddle me those, Batman! 😐
That’s about where the community is on housing as well.
“Not so much . . . ” — Borat
“They are not reflexively against all projects but they don’t want the council to have the power to unilaterally approve peripheral projects.
I’ll call it more about accepting one’s circumstances, not “don’t want”. I would betcha they “do want”.
“Thus ironically, despite its reputation for slow growth extremism, over the last 25 years or so, Davis has really become kind of a moderate community.
We are SO moderate! Incredible observation. So incredibly meaningless and wrong 😐 What would we do without the powerful observations of Davildibub’s Vanguard?
Once again, Greenwald invents a slow growth block who are “reflexively against all projects” in order to demonize them and to make the Council look like it is in the “middle,” despite there being no example of a project that the Council objected to. As if that weren’t bad enough, Greenwald bumps up his rhetoric to call this (actually imaginary) block “extremists.” I guess he felt that the previous rhetoric wasn’t doing the job. What’s next?
SUBJECT: “Is the Council Out of Touch with the Broader Davis Community?”
Don Shor January 15, 2023 at 8:49 am
Hey, Ron, did you write an op-ed about Measure J? I’m sure David would have published it. A letter to the editor? Submit a ballot argument?
What did you personally do to oppose it?
Everybody has “a local media platform.”
Jeez, chillax, DS. What did you want him to do, steal a MRAP from Woodland and start clearing the farmland west of Stonegate Lake and ready it for a new subdivision that will ruin the sunsets of our most westerly line of City residents?
In my opinion, Ron G has a point (from his perspective).
That is, David doesn’t want to be known as the blogger who is “Out-of-Touch-with-the-Broader-Davis-Community” (referencing the title of his article), by coming right out and opposing Measure J.
Instead, he attempts to undermine it via a “thousand subtle cuts”, in a “thousand articles”.
Probably what they teach you in political science courses, when you’re fighting a prevailing view.
So in that sense, Ron G has more integrity than David – in that Ron G doesn’t try to disguise his views. Nor is Ron G afraid of being in the minority.
Though if taken at face value (based upon what he’s said), David would prefer to drastically “change” Measure J, rather than totally-abandon it.
David seems to be drifting further-and-further away from the environmentally-minded young man who claims he worked against Covell Village.
That is, David doesn’t want to be known as the blogger who is “Out-of-Touch-with-the-Broader-Davis-Community” (referencing the title of his article), by coming right out and opposing Measure J.
Maybe, but DG seems to have no interest in beauty pagents, I mean popularity contests. Only among his narrow constituency of evil developers (not that all developers are evil) and woketavists.
Instead, he attempts to undermine it via a “thousand subtle cuts”, in a “thousand articles”.
Only a thousand?
Probably what they teach you in political science courses, when you’re fighting a prevailing view.
Well, we saw how well his college writing classes took, so there’s that . . .
So in that sense, Ron G has more integrity than David – in that Ron G doesn’t try to disguise his views. Nor is Ron G afraid of being in the minority.
DG is in the minority. But like late night talk shows nowadays, your audience is your ‘team’, not a broad swatch like in (Johnny) Carson days.
Though if taken at face value (based upon what he’s said), David would prefer to drastically “change” Measure J, rather than totally-abandon it.
I wouldn’t take that at face value.
And the idea of changing Measure J is a great thing to say if you are a politician or a blogger, but it is more unrealistic than getting rid of it — or should I say maybe you could (not that it’s been tried, for a reason) but it wouldn’t be what DG wanted, it would be some mash-up new Measure J by committee and probably a hot mess.
David seems to be drifting further-and-further away from the environmentally-minded young man who claims he worked against Covell Village.
In line with the extremist far left, right off the edge of the world . . . 😐
“not a broad swatch like in (Johnny) Carson days
That’s probably one of the best comparisons I’ve seen, regarding someone who appealed to a broad range of audiences (with quality entertainment, at that).
Usually at his best, when his jokes “failed”. (The jokes themselves were rarely the highlight.)
Sort of like Walter Cronkite in his appeal, regarding the “news”. (Though I think that Lester Holt does a pretty good job regarding that, as well.)
I’ve been watching a lot of David Letterman clips lately, though his audience was not as broad as Carson’s. (Sure is entertaining, though.) Carson seemed to support Letterman, and vice-versa.
For me, I like the “weirdness” and unpredictability of Letterman’s show, as well as the “take-no-prisoners” attitude (regarding celebrities and others of privilege) during his earlier days. But ultimately, his views were actually quite “middle-of-the-road, as well” – which probably supported his longevity.
One of Letterman’s most-entertaining guests was Donald Trump, himself. (At that time, Trump’s more hostile views and comments were not on display. Instead, we primarily saw someone with a sense of humor.)
I’ve been watching a lot of David Letterman clips lately, though his audience was not as broad as Carson’s. (Sure is entertaining, though.) Carson seemed to support Letterman, and vice-versa.
Letterman revealed, right after Carson died, that Carson would write timely jokes anonymously for Letterman’s monologue. Letterman played a collage of these after Carson passed. I think this can be found on YouTube or similar. They were good friends, and Carson wanted Letterman to have the Tonight Show.
For me, I like the “weirdness” and unpredictability of Letterman’s show, as well as the “take-no-prisoners” attitude (regarding celebrities and others of privilege) during his earlier days.
Mee too. Watched him in college 40-plus years ago. (Is that possible?)
But ultimately, his views were actually quite “middle-of-the-road, as well” – which probably supported his longevity.
He’s pretty far left. Not woke though, I wouldn’t think.
A MUST SEE is his 45-minute interview with Volodymyr Zelenskyy. That is available on YouTube. It really humanizes the war from the Ukraine point of view.
Regarding “40 years ago”, I remember (as a kid) when I thought that WWII was “ancient history” (approximately 35 years prior to that “revelation”).
Same with everything that occurred in the 1950s-1960s. (Even though “I” occurred during the latter decade.)
The older I get, the more recent it seems. I must be a time traveler, going backward in time.
Either that, or none of that actually happened, anyway. (Except the Holocaust, of course – can’t deny that occurred, unless I want to get in trouble!)
Yeah, that come to clear light when a contemporary pointed out that the number of years between 1970 and 2020 is the same number of years as between 1920 and 1970.
Mind Blown
SUBJECT: “We Have Attempted to Sanitize the Legacy of Dr. Kin” [David’s Vanguard, Today-ish]
DG say:
I tried hard to suppress my laugh . . .
As a student of Dr. King . . .
Speaking of trying hard to suppress one’s laugh 😐
Greenwald is right that many people have been sharing MLK quotes. Here is one that my friend shared that I rather liked:
“There is nothing more dangerous than sincere ignorance and conscientious stupidity.”
DG: “Greenwald is right that many people have been sharing MLK quotes.”
That is an amazing thing to be right about. So we all three agree that people share MLK quotes. Hallelujah 😐