Tuesday, November 03, 2015
Time to vote and... "Let us express our complete and unqualified contempt for the city’s system of ranked choice voting and taxpayer financing of campaigns."
Monday, November 02, 2015
Dear San Francisco, It's not our fault we have an incompetent buffoon for Sheriff. 62% of us voted against Mirkarimi. Blame Ranked Choice Voting. In the name of all that is good and holy, let's fix this. - Thank you for your attention to this matter.
Monday, February 11, 2013
Eco-lawyers sue San Francisco. Case is dismissed. Losing lawyers demand $1.3 million in legal fees anyway. They may get it. Coming soon to a city near you.
In December U.S. District Judge Susan Illston dismissed a lawsuit filed by the W.E.B.L.E.E.D.U. Axis (Wildly Equitable Biodiverse Litigants for Ecological Extortion and Deep Untruths) to shut down the City's landmark Alister Mackenzie public golf course - Sharp Park. This led some to wonder whether the long running Battle for Sharp Park might finally be over. Spoiler alert: No.
I've been covering this story here and on my other blog and was laboring under no such illusion. On Friday February 8, 2013 the WEBLEEDU's filed a pleading with Judge Illston that demonstrates exactly why these lawsuits will never end:
The press release quotes Bo Links of the San Francisco Public Golf Alliance echoing the feelings of most people hearing this story - with bemusement and incredulity: “It’s a head-scratcher... This is environmental litigation in Wonderland... they lose every motion they file, and their case is thrown out. And now they want the Court to order the City to pay their attorney’s fees?”
"In a curious twist in the long-running fight between anti-golf activists and San Francisco over the fate of the city’s historic public Sharp Park Golf Course, the Tucson-based Center for Biological Diversity, Wild Equity Institute, and a handful of other groups filed a motion here today in Federal Court, asking the same Federal Judge who dismissed their lawsuit in December, 2012 to order the City of San Francisco to pay their legal bill of more than $1.3 Million... The Plaintiffs’ fee motion was filed under a provision of the Endangered Species Act that authorizes the Courts to award legal fees “whenever the Court determines such award is appropriate”. Plaintiffs seek payment for more than 2,000 hours of attorneys time, most of which are billed at hourly rates between $550 and $750."
Of course it makes no sense. But that does not mean the WEBLEEDU's won't get paid. It is very possible that the people of San Francisco will be forced to pay some or most of their attorney fees.
Welcome to the Looking Glass World of Equal Access to Justice Act legal fee reimbursements.
Sunday, February 03, 2013
Ten reasons San Franciscans should support the Baltimore Ravens in the Superbowl
Full Disclosure: I've lived in San Francisco for 30 years. However, as I originally hail from Chicago, Da Bears, Cubs, Bulls, and Blackhawks will always command my sporting loyalties. Still, I have made a sincere effort to get behind the local teams as my second choice. They've not made it easy.
Look - I am enormously grateful to the Niners for knocking the Green Bay Packers out of the playoffs. After the Packers lay down against the Vikings to keep the Bears out of the playoffs, watching Green Bay go to the Superbowl would have been too painful to bear. Since then, I have enthusiastically cheered the Niners throughout the playoffs. But the Superbowl is another matter. There is a very good case for my fellow City citizens to follow my lead and pull for a Ravens win.
Here the top ten reasons why every San Franciscan should reconsider their support for the Niners:
Thursday, March 29, 2012
Don't Cry For Me San Francisco -
The Mirkarimi Musical
The Mirkarimi Musical
Some have characterized this story as a Soap Opera, Godfather Sequel, or Greek Tragedy. They all miss the mark. Nothing less than a full scale Golden Age Hollywood Musical Extravaganza or an Epic Operatic production on a Wagnerian scale will do it justice. Having neither the skill nor the time to do this properly, I'll just sketch out a few ideas in the hope that someone will take this and run with it. My fervent hope is that someday I will be sitting in the front row and watching this production at the San Francisco Opera House. Look for me opening night.
I see a three act production - recognizing the last act and final denouement is yet to be written and unfolding as we speak.
Friday, January 13, 2012
San Francisco Values - Alleged Wife Battering County Sheriff Edition
This mug shot is our new Sheriff, Ross Mirkarimi. He was elected Sheriff in the last election and sworn in on Monday. Friday he was arrested for "domestic violence battery, child endangerment and dissuading a witness" over a recent incident involving his wife, the Venezuelan telenovella actress Eliana Lopez:Friday, December 09, 2011
Friday Flotsam - Fraudsters, Hypocrites, Liars and Politicians. But I repeat myself.
Time once again for the Dividist to stroll down our metaphorical beach and take note of the detritus that has washed ashore and cluttered this little island of rationality in the great big blogospheric ocean.Much of what attracted our attention this week were items that have washed ashore here before. Again and again and again. The Dividist simply does not have the arm strength to throw this garbage far enough into the sea to keep it from washing back on our beach. Pity.
ITEM - "Will No One
The Dividist has been covering "The Case Of The Missing Billion." since it was revealed that heretofore sacrosanct legally segregated client funds were apparently tapped to backstop Jon Corzine's ill-advised "bet the company" wagers at MF Global. Little noticed in his testimony to the Agricultural Committee on Wednesday was this tidbit that foreshadows some coming legal attractions, to whit - The Becket Defense. From Huffington Post:
"Lawmakers asked Corzine to lay out how he may have "unintentionally" contributed to the mixing of customer and firm money. He pointed to the chaos of the hours leading up to MF Global's bankruptcy filing on October 31. "Someone could misinterpret 'You gotta fix it,' which I said the evening of October 30th,'" Corzine said."Yes, "You gotta fix it" could easily be misinterpreted to mean something like "Raid the client accounts if you have to, but get me the time to sell this piece of crap before the street figures out we're insolvent." That kind of misunderstanding happens all the time. Consider this innocent off-the-cuff remark by King Henry II, acted on by nearby knights in his employ, and the next thing he knew, through no fault of his own, he learns the Archbishop of Canterbury was lying in a pool of blood. These things happens.
Thursday, November 10, 2011
Meanwhile, in the People's Republic of San Francisco...
... over 2/3 of our citizenry did not bother to vote in Tuesday's election for Mayor, Sheriff, and District Attorney. Of those who did vote, many did not understand the "Instant Runoff" Ranked Choice Voting used for the first time in the mayoral race.
Before we get to the results, your loyal blogger wishes it to be known that there was something good to come out of this election season. Specifically, the best thing to come out of this election season was rediscovering The Argonaut by way of their current election edition (the image at the top of this post is from the front page of their latest edition).
The Argonaut is a San Francisco institution the dates back in various incarnations to 1877. As near as I can tell, it is published whenever they damn well feel like it. The preface to their election recommendations in this edition is a pitch perfect articulation of my loathing for this election. I can't say it better, so I won't try:
"... let us express our complete and unqualified contempt for the city’s system of ranked choice voting and taxpayer financing of campaigns – to the current (already spent and still climbing to the highest mountain peak) whistle of over 14 million dollars of taxpayer financial underwriting by a bone-broke city of candidates campaigns. Many of them had no business running in the first place – but the city’s idiotic law makes it impossible for them to drop out of the rat race because if they do the practical thing and drop out of a race they know they have no chance of winning, the prudent candidate is has to pay the city back for the taxpayer money received, which most of them can’t afford to do. But if they wait and stay in the race and go ahead and lose as everyone in town including the candidate him (or her) self knows they will. Just how stupid is that? Very."
Sunday, August 28, 2011
And now for something completely local - 16 Candidates
"It would be safe to say that many San Franciscans don't understand public financing...
Raise $25,000 and you get $50,000. Scare up $100,000 and you get a 4 to 1 match for $400,000. No wonder there are 16 candidates for mayor. It's political happy hour... this is a poor use of public funds. This is the first mayoral race with public financing and voters are learning that it allows candidates to get easy money and, in some cases, to waste it.
The weird catch-22 of San Francisco's system is that once the money is spent, a candidate can't drop out of the race unless he or she pays it back. The problem is that a 2007 change in the law made it possible to start pulling in the money nine months before the election. By the time August rolls around, candidates may be hundreds of thousands of dollars in the hole and can't afford to quit."
As Ron Popeil might say - "But that's not all!" At no extra charge we will now throw all sixteen candidates into the mix-master of our first ranked voting / instant runoff election for mayor. On November 8th, all San Francisco voters will cast three votes for mayor in rank order of preference. "Rank" being the operative word in that sentence. Rich Deleon ruminates about the election and The City's progressive future in Sunday's SF Chronicle Insight:
Tuesday, January 04, 2011
San Francisco Values - Hamburger Edition
I do understand that - in the most liberal major city with the most liberal governing body in the country - it is impossible to resist the temptation to succumb to their core belief that no one is capable of making any decisions for themselves or their family without their benevolent dictates gently
| The Daily Show With Jon Stewart | Mon - Thurs 11p / 10c | |||
| San Francisco's Happy Meal Ban | ||||
| www.thedailyshow.com | ||||
| ||||
That is SF Supervisor Eric Mar being made to look particularly stupid by Daily Show comedian Asaif Mandvi. It's not like that is particularly difficult thing to do with our Board of Supes, but Asaif did it with an extra helping of much deserved derision.
The local fishwrap transcribes the funniest bit:
The good news is that four of our Supes have termed out and will be leaving office this week. The bad news is that Eric Mar is not among them."But the most brutal part comes when Mar explains that his 10-year-old daughter, Jade, doesn't like fast food anymore after watching the documentary "Super Size Me" with him. Those opposed to the to ban maintain it's up to parents, not McDonalds, to ensure their kids learn healthy habits.
Mandvi: "So she learned from her parents?"
Mar: "That's a large part of it."
Mandvi: (staring in wide-eyed disbelief) "Would it be hard to pass a law to force Netflix to send 'Super Size Me' to every parent in San Francisco?"
Mar: "We can't force Netflix, a private company, to do something like that."
Mandvi: "Are you serious right now?"
Mar: "We have no power to force Netflix or a private company like that to change a business practice."
Mandvi: "So on one hand, you're like, 'We can't do that' but on the other hand, you are doing that."
Mar, looking very tired, shakes his head, stumbles over one of the progressive supervisor's favorite words, equitability, and mercifully the interview ends. Oy."
Reason TV also took note:
The Taiwanese news animators have apparently fallen behind the cultural curve on this story. I am looking at you NextMedia.
Saturday, September 04, 2010
Live Blogging Ron Paul Rally in San Francisco - maybe
I made a contribution to Ron Paul's campaign in 2007 during the ground breaking Fuy Fawkes "money bomb" and have been on his e-mail and phone list ever since. They notified me that he will be in town for a rally today. Looks like it is intended to support Republican John Dennis' quixotic campaign to unseat Nancy Pelosi. Talk about tilting at windmills. Ralph Nader's 2008 Green Party V.P. running mate Matt Gonzalez is also scheduled to appear. Anyway, I think I will make my way down to the Civic Center this afternoon to check it out. Depending on what I find, and subject to the limits of technology and bandwidth, I may do some live blogging on My Other Blog, and then will update a summary here later. Maybe.UPDATE:
Let's just say my live blog effort met with limited success. I'll include a couple of pics from the rally here, the rest are on the other blog. This examiner story matched my observations. Robert Taylor posted a few pics and a report on his blog, including one of your loyal blogger wandering around with head down immersed in his own live blogging efforts.

Sunday, July 25, 2010
Support Prop 19 - Marijuana prohibition hypocrisy is an expensive indulgence Californians can no longer afford.
Joseph McNamara, former San Jose Police Chief, makes the case the for Prop 19 in the Sunday San Francisco Chronicle:
"I've seen the prohibition's terrible impact at close range. Like an increasing number of law enforcers, I have learned that most bad things about marijuana - especially the violence made inevitable by an obscenely profitable black market - are caused by the prohibition, not by the plant...
Experience and research show that the United States has among the world's harshest marijuana laws, yet our consumption rate leads the world and is twice that of the Netherlands, where cannabis sales to adults have been allowed for decades. Prohibition doesn't keep marijuana away from young people...
No one can dispute that marijuana already is widely available. At least 1 in 10 Californians consumed it in the past year, despite expensive government efforts. The November ballot's Proposition 19: The Regulate, Control and Tax Cannabis Act of 2010 acknowledges this reality and enables us to manage the cannabis market. Furthermore, taxing legal cannabis sales will provide steady funding for local governments that may help avoid layoffs of police and teachers...
When we stop wasting resources on processing hundreds of thousands of low-level possession cases, we'll be able to focus on keeping impaired drivers off the road, to concentrate on violent crime and on making people feel they and their children are safe from random gang and drug-related shootings. At work, employers will retain their rights to fire employees whose drug or alcohol use affects their productivity...
That perhaps brings up the most significant and least considered cost of criminalizing marijuana - turning people into criminals for behavior of which we disapprove, even though it doesn't take others' property or endanger their safety. It is worth remembering that our last three presidents, Bill Clinton, George W. Bush and Barack Obama, would have been stigmatized for life and never would have become presidents if they had been in the wrong place at the wrong time and been busted for pot during their reckless youthful days. Countless other Americans weren't so lucky. California voters have an opportunity in November to return reason to our state by decriminalizing adult use of marijuana."
Let's try something new in California.
Let's treat this issue honestly and like adults.
Let's treat one another like adults who can be trusted to be responsible for our own lives, as long as we do not harm one another.
Let's pass Prop 19.
Tuesday, July 21, 2009
Stimulus funds flowing through a "Pipeline to Nowhere"
Graphic from the North Coast County Water District - Water Recycling Project Plan
As promised, DWSUWF is following up on an earlier post regarding the potential Pacifica "Pipeline to Nowhere." First, know that your loyal blogger fully understands that in the greater scheme of things, $2m of stimulus funds is less than a drop in the gigantic porkfest bucket that is the Obama Stimulus plan. But... having noticed a potential issue for a local project that has not received much attention, I feel I should try to ensure that at least this one little $2M drop of taxpayer funds does not get wasted.
Work with me here... this is going to be a deep dive into the weeds of this one stimulus project. I will make this as clear and concise as I can.
The Project
Here is the project as described on the Department of the Interior "Recovery Investments" website:
Pacifica Recycled Water Project - Pipeline, North Coast County Water District Pacifica, Calif. Reclamation ARRA Funding: $2,203,750 Total Project Cost: $8,815,000
Local Contact: Kevin O’Connell, Project Manager
Funding will be used to construct new facilities including 3.5 miles of pipeline, a 400,000-gallons storage tank and a new pump station. The project will provide recycled water to irrigation users that currently draw water from the Hetch Hetchy Regional Water System, and thereby reduce users’ dependence on existing potable water supplies.
So far so good. Regardless of ones political posture on the stimulus package itself, and unlike a lot of the pork, waste and just plain stupid expenditures emerging from the Recovery.gov website, this project clearly meets the criteria of what the stimulus package was promoted to accomplish. It is an infrastructure construction project. It will create 275 jobs. It helps relieve the growing pressure on the San Francisco Bay area watershed. It's recycling water during a drought. It is a needed project. What's not to like?
The Problem
Sharp Park Golf course is located in Pacifica but owned by the city of San Francisco. Legislation has been introduced in San Francisco (Item 090329) to close Sharp Park and turn it into a nature preserve in order to protect an endangered garter snake and frog (both of which have lived in harmony on the course property for 70 years).This legislation was submitted by San Francisco supervisor Ross Mirkarimi at the instigation of a well heeled out of state ecology organization with a reputation for intimidating municipalities with their high power legal machinations. They have funded a glossy website filled with half-truths promoting a phantasmagorical photoshopped vision of a "restored" Sharp Park. Nowhere in the website do they explain in detail where the money is going to come from to realize this wildly expensive and poorly thought out fantasy. The only organized opposition to this is an underfunded local grass roots organization of bay area golfers, preservationists and Pacifica residents who are fighting the good fight to save Sharp Park - a historically significant landmark golf course designed by Alister MacKenzie.
The SF Board of Supervisors is currently awaiting a study due at the end of the month, and will then decide the fate of Sharp Park. Common sense dictates that a simple plan be developed to insure the golf course continues to operate in harmony with the red leg frog and the garter snake. That would make perfect sense. But we are talking about the San Francisco Board of Supervisors, egged on by well funded extremist eco-bullies, so - no telling what will happen. They could very well close the course.
Here is the point. If the Supes decide to close the Sharp Park golf course, the approved stimulus water recycling project will literally be a "Pipeline to Nowhere. " There will be no reason to waste $2.2 million of stimulus funds and another $6 million of California funds on this project.
The Prescription
Common sense dictates that a pipeline project to irrigate a golf course should not proceed if the golf course is to be closed. If there is no commitment by local, state, and federal leaders to the continued operation of the beneficiary of the pipeline (the Sharp Park Golf Course) the stimulus funds should be redirected. Again, this pipeline project is a good project that will help the community, create jobs, save water, and is a good use of stimulus funds, if there is a commitment to the Sharp Park Golf Course. So - what will it take to get that commitment?
This blog has a limited (if loyal) readership. However, I will do what I can to put a spotlight on the potential of funding a "Pipeline to Nowhere." Faced with public embarrassment, public officials will generally take the path of least resistance. In this case that path is a simple rational common sense approach:
- Commit to the continuation of the Sharp Park golf course.
- Implement procedures at the course to further protect the snake and frog.
- Build the pipeline to irrigate with recycled water.
- Find a way to inoculate Pacifica and San Francisco against abusive lawsuits from the eco-bullies in Tucson.
Mayor Gavin Newsom of San Francisco
Mayor Julie Lancelle of Pacifica
Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger
Representative Nancy Pelosi (8th District)
Representative Jackie Speir (12th District)
Senator Diane Feinstein
Senator Barbara Boxer
Vice President Joe (Stimulus Sheriff) Biden
Government Accountability Office - Fraudnet
Department of Interior - Office of Inspector General
Anyone else who might shine some additional light on this project
Feel free to chime in. I'll also try to get some reporters, and other blogs interested.
To borrow a phrase from the Bravo Channel - let's see what happens.
UPDATE:
Pacific Riptide has been covering the pros and cons from a Pacifica perspective. They have a link to a video of Mayor Julie Lancelle recounting the history of this political battle to local Democrats last Saturday . She is fighting the good fight. Pacifica is lucky to have her as mayor.
Now that is fair.
Thursday, July 09, 2009
Stimulus dollars to be spent irrigating a golf course that will be closed.
It looks like the Obama stimulus package that does not stimulate finally found a local "shovel ready" project to stimulate: Pacifica golf course, parks to use recycled water
By Julia Scott
San Mateo County Times
"PACIFICA — A local water treatment plant will soon be piping 50 million gallons of treated, recycled water to the Sharp Park Golf Course and other sites in Pacifica thanks to a $2.2 million grant from the federal government. The North Coast County Water District, which serves potable water to Pacifica and part of San Bruno, got word last week that a shovel-ready project 10 years in the making had been greenlit by the grant, paid for by the federal stimulus package... The SFPUC will use 78 percent of the water to irrigate Sharp Park (the golf course is in Pacifica but owned by San Francisco) and therefore owes a larger part of the debt."
Snakes to inherit Sharp Park golf course
Bruce Balshone
San Mateo Public Policy Examiner"Supervisor Ross Mirkarimi introduced legislation (see item 090329) aimed at turning the Sharp Park Golf Course in Pacifica into a biological reserve, much to the dismay of golfers and Pacifica city leaders. The venerable course, which opened in 1931 was designed by famed architect Alister Mackenzie and landscaped by John McLaren, is actually owned by the City and County of San Francisco despite sitting squarely within the City of Pacifica."
As an enthusiastic patron of the local public golf courses, I have been following the San Francisco Golf Wars with a rooting interest. Generally I would not post a local story on this blog, but with stimulus dollars now literally being showered on the golf course, the story does take on a national flavor. This is not a done deal. We are awaiting the results of a study designed to impartially validate and rationalize the pre-determined conclusion of the board of supervisors. To whit - demolishing a historic landmark to protect endangered species that have been quite happy living under the stewardship of the self-same golf course for the last 75+ years.
I sure hope those endangered frog and garter snakes are real thirsty, because they are about to get a lot of very expensive water. One wonders if the stimulus bill watchdog - Joe Biden, knows that taxpayer dollars are being spent to irrigate a golf course that may soon not exist? I wonder if Mayor Gavin Newsom and the San Francisco Supervisors will be in as much of a hurry to close this course if local stimulus dollars and jobs hang in the balance? Stay tuned...
Now that is fair.
Saturday, December 29, 2007
Republican Like Me
On the right, MW (R) , soliciting illegal corporate contributions to lobby corrupt members of congress for political favors.
For a year the idea had haunted me, and Thursday night it returned more insistently than ever. If a Democrat became a Republican in San Francisco, what adjustments would he have to make? What is it like to experience discrimination based on political belief, something over which one has limited control? This speculation was sparked again by the blog post glowing on the laptop screen in the den of the high rise condominium that served as my office. It was Jon Swift's "Best Blog Posts of 2007" year end round-up, linking my June 23rd screed explaining why I must become Republican in order to preserve divided government. In an overlapping window on the screen, a story from the LA Times [1] showing how new California Republican primary rules might work to Ron Paul's advantage in heavy Democratic districts like San Francisco. As few as 7,000 Ron Paul votes in San Francisco (California Congressional District 8) could garner as many delegates at the Republican convention for Ron Paul as the Republican winner in "Loyal Bushie" territory like Orange County. Another window was open to the December 5th Evans-Novak Report - Money quote: "Republican confidence about winning the presidency actually has declined... We have had several Republicans tell us ... they wondered not only about the outcome of the '08 presidential election but also the long-range future of the GOP."
If it was that bad for Republicans in the rest of the country, what would it be like for Republicans in San Francisco? I feared for the local Republicans, despite the assurances of the supposedly "tolerant" Democratic San Francisco Mayor and all Democratic Board of Supervisors, who continue to insist they represent a culturally diverse community, committed to tolerance and the the rights of all, claiming to accept and embrace people of all colors, creeds, religions, sexual orientations, and beliefs. "Right." I thought. "They tolerate everyone except Republicans". I lingered on, looking out at the view of Alcatraz and San Francisco Bay. My wife slept in the room next door. I sat there, surrounded by the cool ocean breeze coming through my open window, listening to the sea lions barking in Fisherman's Wharf, unable to leave, unable to sleep.
How else except by becoming a Republican could a Democrat hope to learn the truth? Though we lived side by side throughout the blogosphere, communication between the two political parties had simply ceased to exist. Neither really knew what went on with those of the other party. The Republicans will not tell the Democrats the truth. In 2006 they learned that if unpleasant truth is revealed to Democrats, the Democrats will cause Republicans to lose elections and go to jail.The only way I could see to bridge the gap between us was to become a Republican. I decided I would do this. I prepared to walk into a life that appeared suddenly mysterious and frightening. With my decision to become a Republican, I realized that I, a political blogger, knew nothing of the Republican's real problem. I knew then that I must enter 2008 as a Republican.
Friday was gray, cold, wet and depressing, matching my mood perfectly. Except for the wet part. I donned my best "Jack Abramoff" trenchcoat, and walked down the hill to City Hall.
The San Francisco Department of Elections is in the basement of City Hall. It was a short easy
form. In a few minutes the painless procedure was over. I was a Republican. I asked the clerk if I was the only Republican in San Francisco. "No." she said as she turned her back and walked away. "There are some others." She didn't seem interested in talking to me, would not meet my eyes, and behaved as if I was not even there. "I am still me..." I thought. "I have not changed." Yet, somehow it seemed things had changed around me.
As I walked out, I stopped to look at a memorial in City Hall for soldiers of the
Army's 363rd Infantry Regiment, the unit called "San Francisco's Own." The memorial commemorates the combat action of the unit in the 1918 Battle of the Meuse-Argonne. The plaque says "360 killed, 980 wounded..,Distance advanced into enemy territory 34 kilometers." On the way in, as a Democrat, I wondered if those 34 kilometers were really worth the 1,340 casualties. On the way out, as a Republican, I was ashamed of myself for not supporting the troops and questioning the wisdom of our WWI leadership.
In the rotunda a wedding was in progress. A heterosexual wedding. In front of a Christmas tree. My first thought - "Bill O'Reilly needs to know about this." Maybe there is some hope for The City.
Walking back I stopped at a Starbucks on the corner of California and Van Ness to warm up. Earlier in the day, as a Democrat, I had ordered a Vente Double Latte with organic Guatemalan espresso regalo, certified grown without exploitive labor practices, half caf, half decaf, no-fat milk. Now, as a Republican, all I wanted was a small coffee - black.When I got home, I thought back to what the election clerk told me, but found no comfort knowing I was not the only Republican in San Francisco. I refused to wallow in self-pity. After all, being a Republican in San Francisco could not be any worse than a Libertarian lesbian lawyer becoming a Republican in Arizona. I had it easy. But I would need help facing this brave new world. I sat down, poured myself a scotch, and flipped on Fox News.
UPDATE: 3-Jan-07
[1] The referenced LA Times article disappeared behind the their pay to read firewall. For now, the article is still visible in google cache and the relevant paragraph is quoted below:
"Under the rules, whoever wins in San Francisco's District 8 -- represented by Democratic House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and containing 34,000 registered Republicans -- will receive the same number of delegates as the top vote-getter in Orange County District 48, held by John Campbell, with 200,000 Republicans. In Pelosi's district, the winning threshold is low. Primary voter turnout historically is less than 50%, which means fewer than 17,000 Republicans are likely to vote. With a wide field of candidates, the number of votes to win a plurality -- and the district's three delegates -- is likely to be just a few thousand." - Scott Martelle, LA Times
[ * NOTE: The first five paragraphs of this post are a paraphrase of John Howard Griffin's seminal work "Black Like Me"








