Davisite logo
Davisite Banner. Left side the bicycle obelisk at 3rd and University. Right side the trellis at the entrance to the Arboretum.

<

>

Welcome to Al’s Corner – “Pouring Gasoline on the Dumpster Fire of Davis Politics” – April 2023

image from www.sparkysonestop.com

Welcome to April, fools.

Al's Corner is about free speech.  Especially speech you don't like.  If you delete posts because you don't like them, you're an asshole. 

If the shoe fits, wear it.  On your asshole.  An asshole shoe.  Do they come in pairs?

Bon Ami says, "Hasn't Scratched Yet".  At Al's Corner we say, "Haven't Moderated Yet".  Though some day we will, but it will be on principals, not politics.  Someone blatantly violates the rules.  But unlike 'Disappearing Donny', we'll let you know what you did wrong, not simply disappear your comment into a progressive void.  (Full Disclosure:  I once had to moderate one of my own comments – and yes, I did inform myself of it.)

The 'topic' for this month is "Stomping Davis, Crushing Locales".

Based on a March 30th comment in the Davis Vanguard by Dave Hart:  "I’m tired of the emotional and knee jerk negative reaction of those, particularly on the fringe of town next to proposed new development. I would love to see these locales get crushed and I’m starting to feel that way about Davis. I can’t believe I’m saying it, but yeah, we need to be stomped on for being so intransigent and narrow."

Crush & Stomp your fellow citizens, those usual suspects, so intransigent and narrow.  Oh Davis YIMBYs!

Carry on . . .

Posted by

Alan C. Miller

on

in

Davisite logo

Did you enjoy reading this article? Then subscribe to the Davisite for free and never miss a post again.

Comments

84 responses to “Welcome to Al’s Corner – “Pouring Gasoline on the Dumpster Fire of Davis Politics” – April 2023”

  1. Keith

    “The amount of vitriol and purposeful misrepresentation of others displayed by some commenters in that Vanguard article was also unprecedented. The only possible reason I can see for that is that they felt unnecessarily threatened.”
    What I don’t understand Ron is why the name calling and personal attacks are allowed in the first place when it’s against Vanguard comment rules. Then when someone is attacked and they try to respond their comments or rebuttals often aren’t allowed. If the responses somehow broke comment rules then the initial attacks shouldn’t have been posted in the first place.

    Reply
  2. Ron O

    Keith: The “reason” it’s allowed is because they (Don Shor, and David Greenwald) don’t care about the Vanguard’s own rules. At this point, they don’t even try to deny that.
    And neither does the Vanguard’s board.
    This is the reason that so many hate the Vanguard, and so few bother to comment on there. In other words, it’s not simply due to the one-sided presentation of issues.

    Reply
  3. Alan C. Miller

    Yeah, Ron & Keith. To paraphrase Marjorie Taylor-Greene from a few days ago:
    “The Vanguard sucks! . . . and everybody knows it” 😐

    Reply
  4. Ron O

    It does suck, Alan.
    Perhaps that’s what happens when you try to turn a blog into a business.
    Fortunately, there’s now the Davisite – which welcomes a broader range of views (with respect). And isn’t trying to create a business out of it.

    Reply
  5. Alan C. Miller

    I can’t even imagine deleting people’s postings for expressing their views. To feel the need to protect people from other people’s views, or even to believe you have the power to do that, what sort of mental illness is that? I have yet to delete a single post (sans one of my own). I’m sure it will happen some day, but it will be based on the written guidelines, which are based on principles, not politics or deteriorated mental function.
    But hey, the Vanguard is sponsored by Fletcher the Frog!
    No conflict of lily pads there 😐

    Reply
  6. Keith

    ” it will be based on the written guidelines, which are based on principles, not politics”
    I can’t tell you how many times I’ve emailed David Greenwald or posted on the site and asked that they moderate according to their posted rules and not their political biases.

    Reply
  7. Keith

    Here’s another perfect example of the biased Vanguard moderation.
    Walter Shwe April 26, 2023 at 4:58 am
    This demonstrates that a certain group with axes to grind enjoys lying about San Francisco violent crime. It’s not Democrats that have engaged in this reprehensible practice
    Keith April 26, 2023 at 6:50 am
    Your comment is awaiting moderation.
    It’s Democrats and Democrat policies that have turned SF into the cesspool that it is now.
    So what’s wrong with my response that has since been deleted? What Vanguard rules were broken? It all comes down to bias.

    Reply
  8. Keith

    More comments deleted, I guess they think only their comments count.
    “you are carrying and forwarding a very alt-right message from a group that has close connections with Ron DeSantis, The Proud Boys, Libs of Tik Tock, etc.”
    Oh no, not Ron DeSantis.
    I’ve never heard of the Proud Boys doing a story hour like the “Drag Queen Story Hour” like we’re seeing pop up everywhere.

    Reply
  9. Keith

    And this:
    Don Shor April 27, 2023 at 2:45 pm
    From what I’ve seen (periodically watching some of the conservative commentators on YouTube), “Libs of Tik-Tok” is not an anti-gay site.
    You must be kidding me. Do some research before you post next time. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Libs_of_TikTok
    My response which was deleted by the moderator, and who is the moderator? One guess.
    Keith April 27, 2023 at 3:53 pm
    Your comment is awaiting moderation.
    I did some research and according to its founder Wikipedia is not to be trusted:
    Wikipedia co-founder Larry Sanger has warned that the website can no longer be trusted — insisting it is now just “propaganda” for the left-leaning “establishment.”
    https://nypost.com/2021/07/16/wikipedia-co-founder-says-site-is-now-propaganda-for-left-leaning-establishment/

    Reply
  10. Ron O

    Keith: Below is my response to Don, in regard to that same comment from him. (By the way, I could do without the admonishment from him, as it’s usually incumbent upon the commenter to put forth references, not the reader. Along those same lines, how many people “research” what other people claim?)
    I challenge anyone (including Don) to describe how my comment below supposedly broke Vanguard commenting policy. Or how yours did.
    (To Don:) “No – I wasn’t kidding, though I’ve never looked up any information about them.
    A description on Wiki shouldn’t necessarily be taken as a factual definition. But from their activities listed (just skimmed though them), it appears to be more of a site opposed to transgender medical interventions for minors, and anyone or anything that they view as encouraging it. (Especially teachers or medical personnel.) Looks like they view drag shows presented to children in a particularly-negative light.
    Unfortunately, attracting some other negative aspects to it.
    I previously attempted to post a link on here regarding a hospital in Tennessee (in regard to medical interventions for minors) which was quite disturbing, but it wasn’t allowed.
    Other than the negative aspects that it attracts, I’m thinking that “Libs of Tik-Tok” might actually be shedding some light on the situation. There’s a reason this is getting attention (along with reactions one way or another).
    Ultimately, videos speak for themselves. The only thing I’ve seen are videos that have been posted by the creators themselves, but “gathered and rebroadcasted” via Libs (through conservative commentators). And again, some of them actually are disturbing (or amusing, or both).”

    Reply
  11. Keith

    Yes Ron, it’s hard to have a fair discussion when the person you’re debating with has the power to censor your comments.

    Reply
  12. Keith

    Two knife wielding murders in Davis parks a few days apart, I doubt that they’re not connected.

    Reply
  13. Keith

    Here’s yet another comment that wasn’t allowed on the Vanguard even though it broke no rules:
    “Go rail at them. I’m not here for it.”
    There’s railing occurring on both sides of this issue, I feel some of the remarks directed at Beth Bourne are uncalled for and over the top.

    Reply
  14. Ron O

    Keith: “There’s railing occurring on both sides of this issue, I feel some of the remarks directed at Beth Bourne are uncalled for and over the top.”
    There’s really only “railing” occurring regarding those who feel unnecessarily (and extremely) defensive regarding the issue. Not sure where that’s coming from.

    Reply
  15. Keith

    Ron, apparently one can now have their Vanguard comment deleted if in the opinion of the moderator it was not relevant or argumentative.
    Talk about a subjective moving target. That would include a very high number of current comments.

    Reply
  16. Alan C. Miller

    SUBJECT: “My View: Really? The DA Is Considering the Death Penalty in the Serial Killer Case?” [TODAY! DVG]
    DG: “More and more we see that many young people can in fact turn a corner and end up doing a lot of good.”
    Most of us start with how best to protect the public, then consider such notions. You do the opposite.
    DG: “It can never erase the past and many live with the specter of their crimes for the rest of their lives.”
    And some create new memories. I’m more concerned with our ability to erase their future, so additional innocent futures are not erased.
    DG: “But that is a question for another day and debate for another time.”
    Disingenuous lie. Let me translate your statement for you: “This was my main point, and I won’t let anyone challenge it because I’m afraid of dissenting opinions, so I’ll declare that debate for another time, when in reality we’ll just delete opposing comments on that topic.”
    DG: “The sooner the DA gets the death penalty off the table, the sooner we can get back to honoring the lives of David Breaux and Karim Najm.”
    OK, not a Boomer
    DG: “I am increasingly against LWOP”
    Increasingly? Seems to me you were fully there a long time ago.

    Reply
  17. Ron

    Alan M (in response to David Greenwald): “Most of us start with how best to protect the public, then consider such notions. You do the opposite.”
    That’s for sure.
    By the way, we need a new (May) installment of Al’s Corner.

    Reply
  18. Walter Shwe

    I see a clear pattern of many of the comments here being nothing more than pity parties about the Davis Vanguard and even people like me. This is truly pathetic.

    Reply
  19. Keith

    Hi Walter, welcome to a site where everyone can discuss issues on even ground where the rules are applied equally without needless over moderation regardless of your political affiliations.

    Reply
  20. Ron O

    Glad to see Walter commenting on here. I submitted a comment on the Vanguard “inviting” him to do so, since he mentioned this site. (However, it appears that the comment was not posted.)
    “Al’s Corner” is not limited to bitching about the Vanguard, though that has predominated. And the reason for that is primarily due to the way that the Vanguard is moderated.

    Reply
  21. Alan C. Miller

    Good morning Mr. Shwe. I see a clear pattern of many of the comments made on the Vanguard being nothing more than . . . 😐 😐 😐
    Here at Al’s Corner we are all about the big rave pity parties re: the Davis Vanguard, and even about people like you (or so you say).
    My name is Alan Miller. I am truly pathetic, and may I add: heartless (somebody added that, who was it . . . ?). I sell moss and fungi and live near Woodland in a fake barn. I moderate a blog.
    I have never deleted a comment. Not once. Well, except one of my own.
    The one rule we have here is: never tell people they live in Woodland. Other than that, everything is fair game.
    And remember, I live in Woodland. Keith lives in Woodland. Ron lives in Woodland. Colin lives in Woodland. Todd lives in Woodland. Roberta lives in Woodland. David lives in Woodland. Don lives in Woodland. Highbeam lives in Woodland. The mayor of Davis lives in:
    Shout it to the mountaintops, people!!!! WOOD LAND
    But never tells anyones heres they lives be in Woodland.
    You have been cursed, Mr. Shwe. Simply by allowing yourself to post here, just once, you are forever doomed by the evil witch of reality (may a house fall on her sister!) You are now on a three-year path, upon the end of which, come 2026, you will be slightly more conservative. Perish the thought 😐
    Should you or any of your progressive friends fail to grasp reality by 2026, Al’s Corner will disavow any knowledge of your existence, and delete all your posts.
    This blog will self-destruct in five seconds. Good luck, Walter.

    Reply
  22. Ron O

    Alan: I figured that everyone on your list lives in (or has a connection to) a McMansion just outside of Davis city limits, adjacent to a golf course.
    Or, in El Macero, Dixon, etc.
    But none of those possibilities are the focus of articles (on here, or on the Vanguard). Or more accurately, should NOT be.
    It never was about that, nor was it about disclosure. Nor should anyone be fooled into thinking that disclosure is the actual goal of those making such comments.
    Of course, if the Vanguard adhered to its own commenting policy, the Davisite might never have been created.
    One other difference: The Vanguard is a business, the Davisite is not.

    Reply
  23. Colin Walsh

    I was born in Woodland.

    Reply
  24. Ron O

    May 7, 2023 at 2:26 pm
    The two speakers are not credible. Colin Wright’s assertions have already been discredited and Allie Snyder is a representative of Moms for Liberty – a far right political activist group, funded by far right donors, that is working to elect far right representatives. There is no other information about Allie Snyder that I can find. I’m not sure she even lives in Davis.
    (Apparently, personal attacks and attempts to dox are still encouraged on the Vanguard. Several examples in that article, actually.)

    Reply
  25. Alan C. Miller

    “Colin Wright’s assertions have already been discredited and Allie Snyder is a representative of Moms for Liberty – a far right political activist group, funded by far right donors, that is working to elect far right representatives.”
    RO: The doxxing was creepy enough, but not what disturbed me the most. What disturbed me was the one-truth single-mindedness, or should I say simple-mindedness. i.e.:
    1) ‘The speaker’s assertions were discredited’ – and that’s that, apparently! Good enough for SC. And SC’s um . . . followers?
    2) MFL is . . . label as ‘far right’, demonization complete. No nuance. Mission complete.
    True believers and their tiny tiny brains.

    Reply
  26. Alan C. Miller

    Yes, Colin was born in Woodland. Be where were you conceived ?

    Reply
  27. Ron O

    Alan: I agree. A substantial portion of the Vanguard’s arguments (including those from its supporters) consist of attacking the credibility of the source, whether it’s an individual or organization.
    Rather than actually engaging in debate of the issue(s).
    Maybe that’s enough for some people, but I’m becoming less-and-less impressed by this form of non-debate.

    Reply
  28. Ron O

    Nordstrom Rack is coming to University Mall. Great news.
    https://www.davisenterprise.com/news/comings-goings-nordstrom-rack-on-its-way/

    Reply
  29. Ron O

    Another comment that the Vanguard hasn’t posted, while allowing another (subsequent) comment from the moderator himself to be posted.
    Ron O. May 13, 2023 at 6:59 am
    Your comment is awaiting moderation.
    This statement is not based on reality: “They’re living somewhere, already, and there’s no reason to assume they’d move out of wherever they’re living”
    What part of that is not based upon reality? It’s a factual statement. You’re claiming that they don’t already live “somewhere”?
    Interestingly-enough, I’m reasonably sure that a certain UCD professor (who is essentially a YIMBY leader) lives in a more-expensive locale than Davis (San Francisco), and commutes to Davis via Amtrak. The reason being that he seemingly talks about this commute, in his public comments.
    But as far as the points you brought up:
    1. It was my suggestion to first start with that very point, assuming that the goal is for the city to provide housing for new faculty and staff. First, start with the net, projected increase going forward. (This would have to account for those leaving, as well.) I have yet to see any numbers regarding that.
    2. Relevance?
    3. This is (no doubt) one of the most incorrect assumptions you’ve made. Once newcomers have made their choice (e.g., comparing what’s already available in Davis vs. surrounding cities), that choice is not easily (or inexpensively) “undone”. Some may do so, but conversely – some may move out of the city to nearby cities as well. Again, you’d need to project the net projected change, regarding this. And once again, it would be an estimate – though you can probably compare the number of people who moved from nearby areas to The Cannery, to start with. And then determine if they actually are staff/faculty, at UCD.
    Your entire assumption here is also dependent upon folks ignoring pre-existing housing, in favor of something “new”. Mello Roos also plays a factor regarding such decisions.

    Reply
  30. Alan C. Miller

    SUBJECT: “Commentary: Video Release Does Not Quell Calls for Justice in Killing of Banko Brown” [DVG Today]
    Walter Shwe May 19, 2023 at 9:05 am
    DA Jenkins, the Chronicle, Senator Wiener and Supervisor Peskin must have either not all seen the same video footage or Jenkins’ definition of self-defense varies significantly from the commonly accepted definition.
    Log in to Reply ↓
    Ron Oertel May 19, 2023 at 9:39 am
    I was surprised as well, when I watched the video. I saw no real justification for it, OR for the physical confrontation prior to the actual shooting. In fact, I understood that guards (these days) are pretty much instructed to NOT engage in such confrontations – partly because of results like this.
    May 19th, 2023, a day that will live on in infamy: Walter Shwe and Ron Oertel agree on something

    Reply
  31. Alan C. Miller

    Exciting comment day at the Davis Vanguard (Monday 5/22). Thrilling.
    Maybe David Greenwald should consider writing an article on HOUSING to generate some interest 😐

    Reply
  32. Alan C. Miller

    Moderator May 22, 2023 at 12:33 pm
    Five comment rule is in effect.
    Oooooo scary! Live by the moderator. Die by the moderator.

    Reply
  33. Kelvin Williams

    Will there be a new June 2023 Al’s Corner post sometime soon? And if so, may I humbly suggest, for somewhere in the lead-in, an applicable line by a folk hero: “This town needs an enema.”
    Maybe even an affordable, walkable, multi-family enema.
    In other news, thank you for the gas on the dumpster fire. I can only read so much about local politics without going crazy, and it looks like I’m in good company there.

    Reply
  34. Ron O

    Here’s some of what’s been allowed to be posted in response to comments I’ve made on the Vanguard, over the past few days:
    Richard McCann: “Sometimes Ron O argues for market mechanisms to work and then other times he argues for restricting supply or demand to manipulate market prices to control the growth that interferes with his drive south down Poleline.”
    (This is what I’d label as a “lie”, from someone appointed to a city commission no less. So far, I haven’t even bothered to post a response on the Vanguard, nor do I know if they’d allow me to.)
    Walter Shwe: “Ron refuses to believe anything that doesn’t align with his completely rigid No Housing Anywhere view with the exception of his own house. He refuses to believe any objective statistics or new media reports, just his own completely subjective anecdotes and guesses.”
    (My response was totally deleted, in that it’s not even retrievable. And since I didn’t expect it to be deleted, I didn’t save it this time. All I said was to “let me know when you have any objective statistics”, and that those statistics require analysis.)
    Walter Shwe May 19, 2023 at 4:56 pm
    “A troll is Internet slang for a person who intentionally tries to instigate conflict, hostility, or arguments in an online social community. Platforms targeted by trolls can include the comment sections of YouTube, forums, or chat rooms.
    (When I repeated Walter’s quote a couple of days later in response to something that Walter said to someone else, it was not posted.)
    Make of this what you will. In my opinion, this is why the Vanguard is despised. And a reason that I will never set foot in The Redwood Barn again. It actually has nothing to do with political views or arguments – it’s the way that they treat those whom they don’t agree with.
    Again, let me repeat – the folks running the Vanguard are only interested in “slash-and-burn” politics. They’re not actually interested in debate. Anyone contributing money or anything else to them is supporting that approach.
    By the way, when are they going to post their “non-profit” tax returns for the most recent years?
    This is the key difference between the Vanguard, and the Davisite. The Davisite would never allow these type of comments, much less delete the response to them. Well, that – plus (unlike the Vanguard), the Davisite is not a business.

    Reply

Leave a reply to Walter Shwe Cancel reply