Anchor ads are not supported on this page.
Print Edition
Classifieds
Stories
Events
Contests
Music
Movies
Theater
Food
Life Events
Cannabis
May 1, 2024
April 24, 2024
April 17, 2024
April 10, 2024
April 2, 2024
March 27, 2024
March 20, 2024
March 13, 2024
March 6, 2024
February 28, 2024
February 21, 2024
February 14, 2024
Close
May 1, 2024
April 24, 2024
April 17, 2024
April 10, 2024
April 2, 2024
March 27, 2024
March 20, 2024
March 13, 2024
March 6, 2024
February 28, 2024
February 21, 2024
February 14, 2024
May 1, 2024
April 24, 2024
April 17, 2024
April 10, 2024
April 2, 2024
March 27, 2024
March 20, 2024
March 13, 2024
March 6, 2024
February 28, 2024
February 21, 2024
February 14, 2024
Close
Anchor ads are not supported on this page.
Obama is now a ONE TERM President.
Gringo, I am familiar with nsam 263: "The President approved the military recommendations contained in section I B (1-3) of the report, but directed that no formal announcement be made of the implementation of plans to withdraw 1,000 U.S. military personnel by the end of 1963." The subject has been addressed in several of the books about Kennedy and the jist of most of them is that while Kennedy expected the US to help South Vietnam win the war. " It remains the central object of the United States in South Vietnam to assist the people and Government of that country to win their contest against the externally directed and supported Communist conspiracy. The test of all decisions and U.S. actions in this area should be the effectiveness of their contributions to this purpose." I have read many books containing the various accounts and while many of them refer to discussions Kennedy had with various advisors regarding the eventual withdrawal of troops, I can't recall ever reading anything in regards to a timetable for troop withdrawls.— December 2, 2009 7:51 p.m.
Obama is now a ONE TERM President.
RobertScorpio, I disagree with your characterization that JFK set 2 time tables to withdraw from Vietnam. Can you please provide your source for this. In the meantime, here is what RFK said on the subject: "In point of fact, the one person who knew JFK better than anyone else, Robert Kennedy, was willing to let history know exactly what his brother's intentions in Vietnam had been as early as 1964 and 1965, the critical period before it had truly become "Johnson's War." In a series of oral history interviews for the JFK Library, RFK said that "it was worthwhile for psychological, political reasons" to stay in Vietnam. "The President felt that he had a strong, overwhelming reason for being in Vietnam and that we should win the war in Vietnam....If you lost Vietnam, I think everybody was quite clear that the rest of Southeast Asia would fall." When RFK was asked point-blank "if the President was convinced that the United States had to stay in Vietnam", the one-word response was "Yes."" Shortly before his assasination, JFK also told Walter Cronkite in an interview " American troops were nontheless not there "to see a war lost" and that he totally disagreed with those who were suggesting the idea of a pullout. "I think that would be a mistake".— December 2, 2009 5:41 p.m.
It's Better To Burn Out Than It Is To Fade
Re # 213 Surfpuppy, You do realize that the LA city council didn't just hire Chief Beck, don't you? He has been with LAPD since 1975. His father retired from the LAPD(as an asst chief) in the early 80's(I guess except for his age, he would be extremely qualified). His wife is a retired sheriff's deputy. His daughter graduated from the police academy 3 or 4 yrs ago; I think Beck was a captain at Rampart at the time. And his son isn't on the LAPD; he is still in the academy. It's not as if the LA city council just hired him and then he got his whole family jobs, which is exactly how you tried to make it seem. So one has to wonder, why is that? Why not at least know some of the facts when you post something?— November 24, 2009 9:08 p.m.
It's Better To Burn Out Than It Is To Fade
#206 cuddlefish, perhaps you misconstrued my "I don't give a damn". I meant I don't give a damn about the arguement these two are having. Why anyone would let something written by an anonymous poster, a complete stranger, bother them, is beyond me. I can appreciate your concern over how your tax dollars are spent and also social justice, but you have to keep a few things in mind. First, regardless of which "class" these hires come from, they are all getting paid basically the same. It's not a matter of how much, just who. And since the "how much" is determined by the contracts negotiated between the union and the city, well let's just say while you may care about how your tax dollars are spent, in this case you really don't have any say in the matter. And as for "social justice", well let's just say that in civil service, it really doesn't exist.— November 24, 2009 8:37 p.m.
Resistance Is Futile
Patrick, I would argue that the Lions fielded watchable teams from 1989 thru 1998. During that time they made the playoffs 1/2 dozen times and won their division a couple of times. But more importantly, those were the years that Barry Sanders played. And imho, any game Barry Sanders was a "watchable" game.— November 24, 2009 3:46 p.m.
It's Better To Burn Out Than It Is To Fade
CuddleFish, I really don't care to get into this "discussion" on SDPD/FD hiring practices, mainly because I really don't give a damn, but I do feel compelled to interject a comment. I agree that surfpuppy hasn't refered to any hirings due to a consent decree that has occured to in the last 20-25 yrs. However, he has refered to hirings made in that time period because of the original consent decree. If you care to check, you would find that in several posts, usually while sparing with JF, he has listed his 4 "reasons" individuals are hired. Numbers 1,2 and 3 are usually friends, family and former military. Number 4 invariably refers to those hired as a result of the civil rights lawsuit and the resultant consent decree for engaging in the practice of the hiring of friends and family. I beleive this was used as recently within the last couple of weeks. And that is in fact saying that the only people that are currently being hired who aren't "family, friends, military," are being hired not for their merits, but because a long since dead civil rights issue. Just wanted to throw my opinion in, for what it's worth.— November 23, 2009 3:19 p.m.
The Oprah Brouhaha
Runaway was a decent movie. I liked Selleck's character towards the end in the skyscraper since I also suffer from acrophobia. Simmons was ok, but I liked him better in Wanted Dead or Alive. The ending had the good guy character bringing out Simmon's terrorist character handcuffed with a grenade stuffed in his mouth while the good guy is leading him with his finger the pin. The good guy tells his bosses to send his fee to the family of his friend who was killed and he'll keep bonus for bringing in the terrorist alive. Then he turns around, says f**k the bonus, pulls the pin and walks away. Classic ending.— November 20, 2009 3:51 p.m.
Junk Removal
I certainly don't want to take money out of Fred's pocket, but there are some other great alternatives. For household items in decent condition, you can try places like the Salvation Army and Goodwill. Also, Habitat For Humanity will take your appliances. Salvation Army and Habitat will pick them up; I don't know about Goodwill. You can get rid of them for free, get a deduction for a charitable contribution and know your items will be put to good use.— November 19, 2009 2:22 p.m.
Losing Z Gallerie
Z Gallerie filed chapter 11 in April, I believe. They have closed about 1/3 of their stores.— November 18, 2009 10:04 a.m.
Sacred Surf
re # 6/7 ".....there is no greater threat to beach culture than a few locals who try to impose their will on the rest of the "kooks" in the world....." It's quite obvious that you are not a surfer, fumber. As any surfer will tell you, at some spots, that IS the culture. I grew up less than a mile from Swami's; my dad and granddad taught me how to surf there and as such I think everyone should be able to surf there. If the promoter is willing to pay for the logistical support to ensure the operation runs as advertised, then go for it. As for locals not being able to surf Swami's during said contest, well, that's pretty much the case at any surf contest. In my years, I've never found the "locals only" attitude at Swami's, but the way some of these guys are talking........................— November 13, 2009 10:04 p.m.