clariece
Ask a Hipster — Advice you didn't know you needed
Big Screen — Movie commentary
Blurt — Music's inside track
Booze News — San Diego spirits
Classical Music — Immortal beauty
Classifieds — Free and easy
Cover Stories — Front-page features
Drinks All Around — Bartenders' drink recipes
Excerpts — Literary and spiritual excerpts
Feast! — Food & drink reviews
Feature Stories — Local news & stories
Fishing Report — What’s getting hooked from ship and shore
From the Archives — Spotlight on the past
Golden Dreams — Talk of the town
The Gonzo Report — Making the musical scene, or at least reporting from it
Letters — Our inbox
Movies@Home — Local movie buffs share favorites
Movie Reviews — Our critics' picks and pans
Musician Interviews — Up close with local artists
Neighborhood News from Stringers — Hyperlocal news
News Ticker — News & politics
Obermeyer — San Diego politics illustrated
Outdoors — Weekly changes in flora and fauna
Overheard in San Diego — Eavesdropping illustrated
Poetry — The old and the new
Reader Travel — Travel section built by travelers
Reading — The hunt for intellectuals
Roam-O-Rama — SoCal's best hiking/biking trails
San Diego Beer — Inside San Diego suds
SD on the QT — Almost factual news
Sheep and Goats — Places of worship
Special Issues — The best of
Street Style — San Diego streets have style
Surf Diego — Real stories from those braving the waves
Theater — On stage in San Diego this week
Tin Fork — Silver spoon alternative
Under the Radar — Matt Potter's undercover work
Unforgettable — Long-ago San Diego
Unreal Estate — San Diego's priciest pads
Your Week — Daily event picks
Buck Howdy's on the Case
I wasn't going to post a response to this article or the ridiculous comments by Chris Cruse and others but enough is enough. How Vaus runs his business is his business. He doesn't owe me or anyone else an explanation. Why aren't you asking how I run my business or how any of the other Recall supporters make a living. Striking out at Vaus personally is a weak ad hominem attack. Here's what ad hominem means: Ad hominem abusive usually involves insulting or belittling one's opponent, but can also involve pointing out possible character flaws or actions which are irrelevant to the opponent's argument. This tactic is weak because insults and negative remarks about the opponent's personal character have nothing to do with the logical merits of the opponent's arguments or assertions. But since you're apparently in a business discovery mode - why not investigate why Betty thought it was ok to represent the seller of a property and also ok to go directly to City Staff to get the property sold. She was in violation of the Political Reform Act. Betty stood to profit on a deal where she used her position as a city council member to influence the City. The City Manager counseled her on this. But yet she continued to abuse her authority. Jim Bowersox felt like a high priced babysitter for Betty. Betty needs to step down now. Even if it's only for 4 months. She's at lame duck at best and a walking legal liability at worst. She can only be trusted currently with introducing the pet of the month at the city council meetings and the opening of the dog park. And people please stop with the name calling and insinuation that somehow we're doing something sneaky or we're not particularly bright. Not one of the pro-Recall supporters have ever called Rexford or her supporters any names or inferred a lack of intellectual capacity. Each side is comprised of intelligent people who are interpreting the facts as presented. Recall supporters rely on the evidence. We argue the facts. We stick to the evidence/facts submitted in the form of deposition transcripts (sworn testimony), handwritten fire logs, a Federal Judge's opinion in his order of defendants' motion for summary judgment, to name a few fact sources. But not once have we ever called you or Betty or the 4 other supporters of Betty jackels, witch hunters, or dirty tricksters. Enough.— November 13, 2009 9:03 a.m.
Buck Howdy's on the Case
As an active member of the Recall Rexford Group not once has Mr. Vaus ever promoted his career during the recall events. The Christmas program was promoted by KSON through the KSON website and emails I received from KSON - NOT Mr.Vaus. Mr. Vaus is performing at the event and handling the ticket sales. This is once again - the typical tactic for Rexford's 4 supporters. Divert the attention from the facts and point fingers. They can't argue facts so let's attack the person. Fortunately for the rest of us, the facts speak loud and clear that Rexford abused her authority and her position. She needs to resign. The fire trucks were there. It was an open secret after the Cedar Fire. The argument to just let her stay and finish her term is not a valid one. She is a lame duck at best and a danger for more legal actions at worst. Betty been limited to the "Pet of the Month" announcement at City Council meetings and the opening the new dog park. It's the only thing she can do where we probably won't get sued.— November 11, 2009 2:56 p.m.