Courtesy of Jim Alex
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
skip to main |
skip to sidebar
Pacifica's Economic Plan
Submission and comment policy
Want to share an article or opinion? Unlike some other Pacifica blogs, Fix Pacifica won't bury viewpoints we disagree with. Send your submission, along with your name, to fixpacifica@gmail.com.
People may comment anonymously, but any comments that degenerate into 1) personal attacks against individual blog participants; 2) incomprehensible gibberish; or 3) attempts to turn conversations into grade-school playground brawls, will be removed.
People may comment anonymously, but any comments that degenerate into 1) personal attacks against individual blog participants; 2) incomprehensible gibberish; or 3) attempts to turn conversations into grade-school playground brawls, will be removed.
Search This Blog
Recent Comments
Get this Recent Comments Widget
Historic Sharp Park Golf Course
Blog Archive
-
▼
2010
(722)
-
▼
January
(92)
- San Carlos council member declines stipend
- Is Jackie Speier giving up her House seat?
- Reporter Butler's Trib article
- City Sewer System - City Council Accountability
- Tonight: Don Peebles on CNBC
- Research News from Penn State U
- City Council adopts Economic Development Committee...
- Pick your battles wisely, hippy!
- Apology
- Is Environmentalism the new Communism?
- I want my big, flat screen TV
- No Worries
- "I ain't gonna be treated this way"
- Styrofoam, the other white beach
- Deceptive Republican Fundraising Tactic
- Nurdle Beach
- State petition for city economic justice
- More propaganda-Follow the Money
- Pacifica Esplanade cliff erosion update
- Pacifica Sales Tax Revenue 3rd quarter losses 2009
- Friendly submission reminder from your friendly bl...
- City email shenanigans
- Mass. Public Opinion
- "2010 State of the City Address" - Mayor Sue Digre
- The city remains directionless
- Jon Stewart discusses Glenn Beck
- Nikolas Schiller blog
- America Rising - An Open Letter to the Democrats
- Does Obama Secretly Want Coakley To Lose?
- Make Mine Freedom
- Stopping state raids essential to protecting local...
- Some fiscal restraint! How refreshing.
- Sidewalk to nowhere
- WEI - WTF?
- Americans help Haiti
- Do you have a Obama Phone?
- "Commie" problem...more "information" from The New...
- No Cost Containment and a Fat New Tax
- The New McCarthyism isn't so new
- Van Jones, 'Green Jobs Czar', a self-described 'co...
- Van Jones
- This weblog is fascinating.
- Better Dead than Red!
- Unions, commies, and the governor's race
- Nothing good about being a Ripfart
- Ross Murky's problems in the Haight
- Storm's a brewin'
- AM radio is back like we used to know it!!!
- How's that Pacifica Riptide "Comment Survey" going?
- Shingles ain't no fun
- Fresh and Not So Easy
- Green technology the old fashion way
- Strong surf weakens ailing coast
- New (and hopefully improved) Posting Policy
- Hey Tubby!
- Haiti earthquake: How to help
- San Mateo County 2009 top ten political stories
- Riptide tries to become more relevant
- State of California 2010 State of the State, and t...
- California Petitions and Ballot Measures
- CNBC Profiles R. Donahue Peebles for "I Am America...
- January 11, 2010 Pacifica City Council Meeting Agenda
- San Mateo County supe hopefuls throw hats in the ring
- Millionaire Peebles says he won't run for mayor of...
- Coastside hippie political group fined for violations
- Godwin's Law (from Wikipedia)
- Pacifica Chamber of Commerce Awards Banquet
- Not a fan of Barbara
- Selfish, old, white golfers donate $4.2 million fr...
- Mayor of Pacifica to Give State of the City Addres...
- This has nothing to do with Pacifica
- Road rage - Father Piers
- New Fix Pacifica Motto?
- Texas vs. Alabama - 8:00 PM Eastern time
- Move to Texas and this is what happens
- Random thoughts for January
- Ready or not, Pacifica’s Styrofoam ban is here
- Pacifica lawyer lashed over marriage
- A radio station, a home and the tenants who have l...
- Owners face costly options for saving imperiled Pa...
- Ross - the speechifying supervisor
- Mirkarimi and Me
- Intelligent life out there? The search continues.
- New Year's Resolution
- Federal Stimulus Money At Work - Bay Area
- Fix Pacifica's Future
- Mayor to Give State of the City Address to the Pac...
- Pacifica's "Golf War" has made it to the Wall Stre...
- Top 10 environmental stories of 2009 in San Mateo ...
- Furloughed State Workers Back to Work?
- Penn State Victorious in Capital One Bowl!
- ... and a Happy New Decade.
-
▼
January
(92)
Visitors:
37 comments:
Funny, I thought I saw that guy in front of Starbucks in Linda Mar.
Trash, predatory posting, targeting a very good friend to Pacifica and this blog, Jeff has even been an important editor getting this blog going.
This is another reason reasonable "free speech" blog guidelines are needed for public article posting access. Hopefully removal of this "lowest common denominator" posting will happen soon.
Such a post must necessarily reflect back on the poor judgement of Jim Alex. Remember any positive posting he has done here? I don't.
Kathy
So it's ok to "trash" people such as Brent Plater John Curtis, Nancy Hall etc. but a funny comment about Jeff or a true comment about Barbara Arietta gets your panties in a wad?
Be consistant...
I don't think Kathy understands that there is a football game tonight for the national championship. Apparently the so-called "Jim Alex" is a fellow traveler of the Communist Tide out of Alabama. No problem, those pinkos will be trampled under a longhorn stampede.
Well Anonymous coward, you make a point-- I guess the difference is integrity of who is being targeted and by whom, and for what reason. Maybe you can't distinguish the difference.
The difference is also what the article is trying to say; there is no say, the article is incomplete and actually makes no point outside the picture-- are pointless posts acceptable? Are goofy picture intended to denigrate ordinary citizens without cause acceptable to you?
As for Barbara, what I said is the Tribune article information is all true, and the way the Tribune posted it appears to be standard procedure. Got a problem with that?
Actually, thanks to the morning CNN post, even Kathy noticed Texas is #2, and Alabama is #1, so lets post it, so I'll do a counter post. And, thanks to you for the reminder.
"I guess the difference is integrity."
Who gets to decide who has integrity? Many of you may disagree, but in my experience, Nancy Hall and Brent Plater are people of great integrity. (I don't know much about John Curtis except that he doesn't post on blogs, which makes him an easy target because he can't defend himself.)
Likewise, many people that Kathy may support are people that I distrust. In fact, I doubt any 2 Fix Pacifica posters would agree on who does or doesn't have enough integrity to be allowed to post on this site.
It looks like Kathy is confusing ideology with integrity.
Kathy, I agree with most of the things you say, generally like the way you make your points, and don't want to argue with you. However, since you've been on this censorship kick, I think you should know that you're starting to sound obsessive and a little bit hypocritical. After all, I didn't hear a peep out of you when people were childishly making fun of John Curtis' weight on this blog.
Take Texas and the points.
This post was not meant as a hit piece. Jim sent the picture around to a few of us, including Jeff, because we like to razz each other. Usually it's about the other guy's school, and it's been on-going for at least a year. I thought it was funny, and posted it as nothing more than good-natured ribbing.
If the picture would have been posted a month ago, people would have gotten a quick laugh, Jeff would have come up with a witty, smart-aleck comeback, and that would have been the end of it.
Scotty, you're right...I didn't personally agree with the bloated McDonald's posting of John Curtis even though his "rule" along with the entrenched others working against progress for this city has been unfortunate: No money = inability to fix Pacifica infrastructure. This is an old city reality. However, the satirical Curtis article was reasonably deserved.
Scotty, did you post a comment to the Curtis satire article? I don't remember. Sometimes other issues take priority.
Ian, John Curtis needed to defend himself? Doesn't he have a long track record which speaks for itself? I think we each understand these issues from a polar perspective. From my view your Hall, Plater, and Curtis comments are pure rubbish. Such "ideology" has kept this city poor and "down and out". And, integrity is more than an overriding "code", but has more to do with honesty and incorruptibility.
No, I'm not confused about words such as "ideology" or "integrity", or the unnecessary deterioration of this city caused by some of your friends-- are you?
"From my view your Hall, Plater, and Curtis comments are pure rubbish."
Of course they are, and that is exactly my point. For this to be a true free speech forum, all points of view need to be heard.
No, Kathy, you didn't see any comments from me opposing the article about Curtis. But then you didn't see any self-righteous comments from me chastising others about their comments on this one either, did you?
Hey wait a minute Scotty, you implied I was a hipocrate, while you made NO protest of the saterical John Curtis post. You didn't explain why you said nothing, to some extent I did, and even offered you a reasoned out.
Now you call me "self-righteous" while all I'm looking for are guidelines of fairness and reliable, factual articles when presented to the public as fact.
If the reasonable guidelines were in place there would be no need to comment about faulty articles and the peculiar poster concerns.
Funny thing Scotty, I don't remember you addressing or taking a position on any of these ethical issues. Guess its all relative following what has now been posted as the devolution motto for this blog. Waste of time. Let's see what elevated commentary comes out of that.
Ian, you said a) "in my experience, Nancy Hall and Brent Plater are people of great integrity." Then, you agree with me b) ".. Hall, Plater, and Curtis comments are pure rubbish." Which is it a) or b)?
Again, the primary concern I have about this blog is that front page articles presented as reliable fact are in fact reliable. Also, that some fairness guidelines are build-in to blog article and commentary. The vulgar alternative is found in a recent article posted here.
Kathy,
After rereading my post I can see that I didn't communicate my point as clearly as I had hoped.
When I said "of course they are" I was not agreeing that the comments in question were rubbish, but rather agreeing that of course you would think they were so.
I hope this clarifies things, but am not entirely sure it will, such are the hazards of the written word. I am reminded of the famous baseball announcer's line, "Winfield's head hits the wall ... and it's rolling towards second base!"
Saying Brent Pater is a person of "great integrity" is like saying Hitler did some good things. As he has shown, Plater will say and do anything to shut down the golf course.
He has lied publically about the finances of the golf course. He has called out a council member for "being drunk" at a meeting.
Plater has changed course so many times on the GC issue it's hard to figure out what he really wants other than to deny thousands of people their right to play golf.
Pure and simple Plater is a liar and incapable of telling the truth. Remember, integrity means doing the right thing even when no one is watching.
Butch has unwittingly invoked "Godwin's Law" which states that "as an online discussion grows longer, the probability that someone will invoke Hitler or the Nazi's approaches 1."
There is a tradition that "once such a comparison is made, the thread is finished and whichever side invoked Hitler has lost whatever debate was in progress." (from Wikipedia)
Butch's entire post is full of the slander and hyperbole ("Plater is a liar and incapable of telling the truth") that typifies what has gone unchallenged on this site.
The fact that someone is now trying to censor relatively tame criticisms of their allies can only be attributed to personal bias.
It's ironic to hear Ian accuse someone of slander after his buddy was tossing around unsubstantiated accusations about Vreeland's drunkenness. It's even more ironic to hear him talk of hyperbole with the ridiciulous and ever-changing string of lies he and Plater have been spewing about the golf course.
Ian, Butch has a point, and the comparison to Hitler in this instance is the exception to what you've poised as "Godwin's Law". The issue is the kind of irrational charisma Brent Plater projects in his controlling globalization of lies.
The only exception to Godwin's law is comparing someone to Hitler that also attempted to exterminate the Jews. I don't write the law, I just report it.
the only difference between Plater and Hitler is that Hitler only wanted the Jews off the planet. Plater wants all humans to cease to exist.
"Godwin's Law applies especially to inappropriate, inordinate, or hyperbolic comparisons of other situations (or one's opponent) with Hitler or Nazis or their actions" (Wikipedia). Johnny StuntDriver automatically loses.
the only difference between Plater and Stalin is Stalin only wanted 20 million people dead. Plater wants all humans dead.
Sorry. Thread was already finished as a corollary of Godwin's law.
Wow, thanks Ian. I think we've reached the highest level of discourse possible.
The only thing I can think of that might raise the sophistication level of this discussion is "I'm rubber, and you're glue. What you say bounces off me and sticks to you."
Scotty - don't confuse Ian's posts with mine. Ian uses his real name. You and I don't.
While Butch certainly proved Godwins Law, I would rather he proved Internet Rule 34.
"Butch's entire post is full of the slander and hyperbole ("Plater is a liar and incapable of telling the truth") that typifies what has gone unchallenged on this site."
So Ian, Plater saying that a council member shows up at a meeting drunk and accusing Sharp Park managment of stealing money(under reporting rounds and keeping the money for themselves)at the same meeting is not slanderous and full of hyperbole? If you say no to this than you must live in a different galaxy than I do. You were there at that meeting, did Vreeland look drunk to you? Did he not say that the management is under reporting rounds?
His actions cannot be defended in any way. He has continually presented lies and deception about Sharp Park.
His and Kathy Jana's comments, whoever that is continue to say that Sharp Park uses 400,000 gallons of water a day to irrigate Sharp Park. Have you seen the sprinklers on there in the last month? NO!!! Yet another lie by Plater and his crowd.
The bottom line is that Brent, Wild Equity(name of the month club) & the CBD are all in cohoots and cannot except the fact that their lies are finally catching up with them.
You know, I really didn't want to jump back into the fray on Sharp Park, but since Butch keeps repeating the same untruths... I guess I better roll up my sleeves one more time.
1. Jim Vreeland acted uncharacteristically belligerent at the meeting in question. At least 4 people smelled alcohol on his breath, including me. Jim apologized for his behavior to me the next day, and publicly at the following City Council meeting.
Brent never publicly said anything about it, but someone posted on Riptide an internal email from him calling Jim "drunk and truculent".
2. Brent didn't accuse Sharp Park of stealing money. He did say, when his figures were being challenged, that the only way his figures could be wrong is if the golf course was underreporting the number of rounds played. He then said he had no reason to think that was the case.
I think it was an attempt by Brent to be too clever for his own good. He was trying to get those challenging his numbers to instead hope that his numbers were correct.
3. Peak water use at the golf course is 414,000 gallons of water a day. Average use is 115,000 gallons a day.
In each of Butch's examples Brent probably should have chosen his words a little more carefully, but none of them rise to the level of a lie or slander, and barely qualify as hyperbole. They certainly don't show him to be "incapable of telling the truth", and anyone who thinks they warrant comparing him to Hitler has their head up their Auschwitz.
In deference to Godwin's law, I am now finished with this thread.
Ian, where's the tape????? I thought you were going to make that public? Oh that's right, you only taped the discussion and not the Q & A. What a crock.
Acsusing someone of stealing is not slander?
Misreporting that the course uses 414,000 gallons of water each day is not a lie?
You just said the daily average is 115,000 which has never been made public in any argument by you or your buddy.
As for Vreeland and "being drunk", I did not smell a thing or remotely think he was drunk. Because the email by Plater was made public, is it not now considered a public comment?
Ian, I admire your passion but you should not continue to defend the actions of a man, Plater who obviously will say and do anything to get his way.
Seems like a hard ethical choice to have to defend Councilmember Vreeland when pitted against Brent Plater.
Don't be fooled. Vreeland and Plater are teammates.
Mike I do not believe that Vreeland and Plater are teammates.
Kathy, as for defending Jim Vreeland, I would do the same thing if it was you or anyone else. What Plater said was wrong and he should be called out for it. No one seems to want to challenge this guy on what he says.
Butch, I agree, but would consider "throwing Vreeland under-the-bus" just following. From what I've observed over his 11 years on city council, his "integrity" is similar to that described by Ian on behalf of Plater, Hall and Curtis-- only maybe sneakier.
Can we start a new thread? I'm tired of looking at that picture...
Hurray for Lois!!!! Makes Jim Alex look like a real jerk, doesn't it?
Post a Comment