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
Close to Home — What it’s like on the street where you live
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
C is for Cookie
Does anyone have a mom that made crappy cookies? I had a friend as a child, who had a mom that couldn't make sweets to save her life. She burned fudge, made dry, crappy brownies. And the cookies were horrible. They were from the cookie dough, and she used some kind of crap butter that just made them awful.— March 14, 2009 12:03 p.m.
Punching Women and Shooting Burglars
Dang it, bambi. I wasn't going to respond to any more of your post, but I just thought of something else. When I worked in radio, some station did a stunt on April Fools Day, where they said the Rolling Stones were playing at a small club. The first 100 fans to show up there that morning, would get in for $20. A bunch drove up there, and a car hit a guy on a motorcycle and killed him. So, the FCC passes some kind of law that if morning DJs do wacky stunts, and someone dies, you are responsible. Now, that didn't sound fair to me, at first. Nobody told these guys to drive like idiots for their Stones tickets. But, it's like yelling fire in a crowded theatre, or inciting a riot. You might be doing something that results in people doing something unsafe, and therefore, you should be liable for what happens afterwards. I would think that an avid gun owner, would be all on board with trying to also get things done so EVERYONE is safer. Because, someone that is a responsible gun owner, always ends up answering for the handful of idiots that create the problems.— March 14, 2009 11:59 a.m.
Punching Women and Shooting Burglars
the last from bambi: The laws requiring guns to be "secured" against access by children are B.S. More kids are killed riding bicycles than are killed by guns, and the laws themselves may prevent kids from taking action to save lives. http://www.lewrockwell.com/poe/poe1.html... I HATE WHEN PEOPLE USE THE ARGUEMENTS "MORE PEOPLE ARE [BLANK] THEN [BLANK]. I'M ALL FOR MAKING POT LEGAL, BUT I HATE WHEN PEOPLE SAY "MORE PEOPLE DRIVE DRUNK AND KILL PEOPLE THAN DRIVING WHILE ON POT." AS IF THAT MEANS WE SHOULD THEN THINK IT'S OKAY TO DRIVE WHILE BEING MESSED UP ON POT. IT'S STUPID LOGIC, IT REALLY IS. SURE, MORE KIDS MAY DIE RIDING BIKES. MORE KIDS MAY DIE FROM BEE STINGS. MORE KIDS MIGHT DIE FROM CHOKING ON HARD CANDY. SO WHAT. WE CAN'T JUST MAKE EVERYTHING ILLEGAL THAT CAUSES A DEATH. BUT WHAT YOU CAN DO, IS LOOK AT ALL THE PROS AND CONS INVOLVED IN EACH THING. AND, WITH GUNS...I'M GUESSING THE STATISTS ARE 0% OF KIDS BEING KILLED BY GUNS IN A HOME WHERE THE PARENTS DON'T OWN A GUN. When you strip someone of their right to self defense by banning the means of self-defense, YOU become responsible. But the problem with "feel good" liberals is they never ARE responsible for the results of their legislation. I DO NOT WANT GUNS BANNED. I'VE ARGUED THIS POINT WITH MY LIBERAL FRIENDS. I FEEL THE NRA GETS A BAD RAP. ESPECIALLY BY IDIOTS LIKE MICHAEL MOORE, THAT SHOWED SCENES OUT OF CONTEXT, OF A MEETING THEY HAD AFTER COLUMBINE. BUT, IT'S LIKE THIS. I INITIALLY FELT MOTORCYCLISTS SHOULD BE ABLE TO DECIDE FOR THEMSELVES, IF THEY WANTED TO WEAR A HELMET OR NOT. MY STEPBROTHER DISAGREED WITH ME. WHEN I USED THE ARGUMENT OF TAX PAYER MONEY, FOR A CYCLIST THAT ENDS UP IN THE HOSPITAL AND HAS NO INSURANCE, AND WASN'T WEARING A HELMET, HE SAID "THE LAW SHOULD BE MADE THAT YOU CARRY A MILLION DOLLARS IN INSURANCE, IF YOU WANT TO DRIVE A CAR WITHOUT A SEAT BELT OR HELMET. AND IF YOU HAVE THAT, IT SHOULD BE YOUR RIGHT." IT SEEMS EXTREME, BUT IT MAKES SENSE. AND IT'S THE SAME WITH OWNING A PIT BULL OR A GUN. WE'VE HEARD THE STATISTICS AND STORIES. THESE ARE DEADLY THINGS. BUT THEY CAN ALSO BE VERY SAFE IF THE PROPER TRAINING IS USED. YET, EVEN WITH ALL THAT TRAINING, SOMETIMES THE DOG JUST FREAKS OUT, AND NOBODY KNOWS WHY. OR, YOUR SON BRINGS HOME A FRIEND, AND WANTS TO SHOW THE OTHER KID "DADS GUN". HECK, I REMEMBER IN 4TH GRADE, A FRIEND SHOWING ME HIS DADS PLAYBOYS. KIDS DO THAT SORT OF THING. AND, YOU SHOULD BE HELD RESPONSIBLE WHEN THAT OCCURS. END OF ARGUMENT.— March 14, 2009 11:55 a.m.
Punching Women and Shooting Burglars
bambi rant continues, with my replies: As for the other guy, the one who allegedly shot people driving around on his property... I don't recognize or have any details on that case. Would be nice if the person writing the column would at least provide enough information to find details so we can decide for ourselves whether the whole story is being told. (And by the way, some state specifically permit the shooting of a criminal in the "curtelege" of your home - the area immediately surrounding the home.) NOT SURE WHAT CURTELEGE MEANS, AND DON'T CARE TO FIND OUT ON A SATURDAY MORNING. BUT SPEAKING OF FINDING OUT, SHOULDN'T BE HARD FOR YOU TO GOOGLE "JAMAL, TWO PEOPLE SHOT" OR OTHER KEY WORDS, TO FIND THE STORY. THE GUY ADMITTED IN COURT, THAT HE FLED THE SCENE. SOMEONE THAT'S JUST 'PROTECTING PROPERTY' AND NOT DOING ANYTHING WRONG, HAS NO NEED TO FLEE THE SCENE. THE GUY DID WHAT STUPID PEOPLE THAT OWN GUNS DO. THEY ARE SO EAGER TO ENFORCE THE LAW, THEY SHOOT BEFORE IT'S NECESSARY. THEIR CAR MAY HAVE BEEN BROKEN INTO TWO TIMES. SO THEY DECIDE THEY'LL SHOOT THE NEXT GUY BREAKING INTO THEIR CAR. SO, THEY SEE SOMEONE OUTSIDE, THEY RUN OUT AND START SHOOTING...ONLY TO FIND IT WAS A DRUNK GUY FROM THE NEARBY TAVERN THAT WAS JUST URINATING NEAR IT OR SOMETHING. For all you idiots who think that gun owners should be liable for acts committed with their firearms without their permission - do you feel the same way about cars? Knives? What about shovels? If someone steals your shovel and whacks someone else over the head with it, should YOU go to jail? What if your shovel is used to kill a kid? If your stolen car is used to run over a cop, should you go to prison for life? What if you left the keys in the car? THE ARGUMENT ABOVE IS WEAK. FIRST, YOU USE KNIVES TO CUT STEAK. YOU USE SHOVELS TO WORK IN THE GARDEN (OR BURY THE BODY YOU JUST ACCIDENT SHOT). YOU USE CARS TO DRIVE. I WILL CONCEED THIS POINT. IF A CRIMINAL BREAKS INTO YOUR HOUSE, AND USES YOUR GUN IN A CRIME, YOU SHOULD NOT BE HELD LIABLE. BUT, IF IT'S A DEPRESSED UNCLE, A CHILD BEING STUPID, AN ANGRY WIFE THAT YOU'RE CHEATING ON HER....THEN, YOU SHOULD BE HELD LIABLE. YOU SEE, GUNS ARE ONLY USED FOR ONE THING: SHOOTING. SURE, THAT CAN BE DURING TARGET PRACTICE OR AT THE SHOOTING RANGE. YOU CAN GO HUNTING. AN ENDEAVOR I HAVE NO PROBLEM WITH (SORRY PETA). BUT YOU CAN HAVE SO MUCH CRIME THAT STEMS FROM SOMEONE KNOWING YOU HAVE A GUN, AND USING IT FOR BAD, THAT YOU SHOULD BE HELD RESPONSIBLE. HELL, I DON'T EVEN HAVE A PROBLEM IF SOMEONE COLLECTS GUNS. I COLLECT MUSIC MEMORABILIA AND OLD RADIOS/JUKEBOXES. I CAN APPRECIATE SOMEONE COLLECTING FIRE ARMS. BUT IF THEY ARE USED, WITHOUT YOU HAVING PROPER SECURED THEM, YOU SHOULD BE LIABLE. IT'S AS SIMPLE AS THAT. ANYONE THAT DISAGREES, IS NO BETTER THAN THE PERSON WITH THE PIT BULL THAT MAULS SOMEONE, AND DOESN'T UNDERSTAND WHY WE DON'T ALSO WANT TO BAN POODLES FROM BEING OWNED BY PEOPLE.— March 14, 2009 11:46 a.m.
Punching Women and Shooting Burglars
more bambi, with my responses following: Same thing with child support. Currently, we have a system where the woman has sole authority to kill a man's child or force him to be a father against his will. If she chooses the latter, then the man is stuck with tens or hundreds of thousands of dollars in payments for something he never agreed to. Take away a woman's unilateral right to choose and let the man have an equal say in whether she has a child or an abortion, and you level the field. I AGREE WITH YOUR ABOVE PARAGRAPH. YOU CAN READ ABOUT THAT IN A PREVIOUS BLOG OF MINE FROM A FEW DAYS AGO. I THINK A PERFECT SOLUTION IS...IF THE WOMAN CHOSES TO HAVE THE CHILD, AND THE GUY DOESN'T, THE COURT TELLS THE WOMAN "YOU WILL ONLY GET CHILD SUPPORT FOR 4 YEARS. THIS WILL HELP YOU, IF YOU WANT TO WORK LESS WHILE TRYING TO RAISE THE CHILD OR WHATEVER. BUT BE PREPARED. IN 4 YEARS, THIS IS ALL ON YOU. AND THE GUY, HAS NO RIGHT TO SEE THE CHILD, IF HE'S PAYING NO SUPPORT." AND, TO ADD TO THAT NEW LAW, THEY SHOULD SAY "IF THE GUY WANTS THE CHILD, AND YOU ARE CHOOSING TO HAVE AN ABORTION AND KILL IT...YOU MUST PAY THE GUY A $10,000 FEE. IF YOU DON'T HAVE THE MONEY, THIS CAN BE MADE IN SMALL MONTHLY PAYMENTS." THAT MAKES SENSE TO ME. A WOMAN SHOULD STILL BE ABLE TO CHOOSE, IT'S HER BODY. BUT THE GUY SHOULD HAVE A BIT MORE SAY IN IT ALL. As for Joe Horn, the neighbor who killed the two illegal aliens robbing his neighbors home - BRAVO! If our federal government had been doing its job, they would have been stopped at the border. I'd love to have a neighbor like Joe Horn, who stood up for his neighbors, who notified the cops, engaged two illegal aliens with criminals records and ordered the thugs to stop. When they didn't, when they advanced on him, he gunned them down. Good for Joe! ALL Americans should be as responsible and pro-active as Joe Horn. I'M GLAD THOSE TWO LOSERS ARE DEAD. I ACTUALLY HOPE THEY HAD A PAINFUL DEATH, AS THEY LAID THERE AFTER BEING SHOT BY JOE HORN. BUT TRUST ME, HORN IS PROBABLY A NEIGHBOR YOU WOULDN'T CARE FOR HAVING. BUT...MY PROBLEM IS THAT HE'S ON THE PHONE WITH THE COPS. IF HE JUST WENT OUT AND SHOT THEM, NO PROBLEM. BUT ONCE YOU'RE ON THE PHONE WITH THE COPS, AND THEY TELL YOU SOMETHING AND YOU GO AGAINST IT, TO "TAKE THE LAW INTO YOUR OWN HANDS" I'M NO LONGER ON YOUR SIDE. BECAUSE, IF THE COPS SHOW UP, GET CONFUSED, AND SHOOT HORN, WHO IS STANDING THERE WITH A GUN, GUESS WHAT? HORNS FAMILY SUES THE POLICE, AND THEY PROBABLY SETTLE WITH HIS FAMILY FOR A FEW MILLION OF TAX PAYERS MONEY. NOT COOL. SO, IF MR. HORN WANTS TO USE HIS GUN TO PROTECT HIS PROPERTY, AND HELL, HIS ENTIRE STREET, DON'T CALL THE COPS. I DON'T WANT THEM SHOWING UP DURING A GUN FIGHT YOU CREATED. MAKE SENSE? AND, IF YOU LISTEN TO THAT RECORDING, HE HARDLY GAVE THEM A CHANCE TO DO ANYTHING. HE CALLED OUT TO THE BURGLARS, AND A SECOND LATER, UNLOADS INTO THEM.— March 14, 2009 11:40 a.m.
Punching Women and Shooting Burglars
Well, I understand there SEEMS to be a law like this on the book. But I'm even talking about, well...I think Columbine. Where the kid BROKE IN to his parents gun collection, which WAS locked up nicely. That adult should be held responsible. I'm going to respond to Bambi below (by the way, sorry about your mom...damn gun owners). Your comments will be below, my responses in ALL CAPS: Regards men and women fighting, if women are to be considered "equal", then when weighing legalities, we need to stop thinking about "him" and "her" and just consider matters in terms of "party 1' and "party 2" If we did that, there'd be no question that when party 1 slugs party 2, party 2 is authorized under law to lay party 1 out. By the same token, 95% of all cases of contested custody of minors would no longer go to women... we'd expect the courts to go 50%-50%. IF IT'S PHYSICAL VIOLENCE, I DO BELIEVE IF A GUY WAS BEAT UP BY A WOMAN, SHE SHOULD DO THE SAME JAIL TIME AS THE GUY. I THINK MOST WOULD AGREE WITH THAT. MY POINT WAS THAT, IN SELF-DEFENSE AGAINST A WOMAN THAT IS 5' TALL, WEIGHS 90 LBS, I DOUBT YOU HAVE TO MAKE HER FACE LOOK LIKE A PINATA IN DEFENSE OF HER TRYING TO SLAP YOU, WHEN YOU GET A BOOTY CALL TEXT MESSAGE. REGARDING CUSTODY, THE COURTS HAVE PROBLEMS, FOR SURE. BUT MOST PEOPLE HAVE DECIDED (DOCTORS, PSYCHIATRISTS, ETC), THAT A CHILD IS BETTER OFF BEING RAISED BY A MOM THAN A DAD. WE CAN DEBATE THE REASONS WHY. I MEAN, I DON'T THINK ANYONE THAT WATCHED KRAMER VS KRAMER FELT MERYL STREEP SHOULD GET THE KID, DID THEY? We could also get rid of alimony, a practice that arose to provide for women at a time when they had no rights. I KNOW OF TWO CASES, WHERE A WOMAN DIDN'T RECEIVE ALIMONY FROM THE MAN, BECAUSE THEY MADE AS MUCH, OR MORE, THAN THE MAN. AND I KNOW A THIRD CASE WHERE A FEMALE FRIEND OF MINE HAD TO PAY HER HUSBAND, WHO IN THEIR 10 YEAR MARRIAGE, NEVER WORKED. ALL OF HER FRIENDS SAID "HIS ASS SHOULD GO OUT AND FIND A JOB." I TOLD HER, "WELL, THERE ARE WOMEN THAT DON'T WORK, AND JUST STAY HOME, TAKING CARE OF THE HOUSE AND KID. THAT'S WHAT HE DID, AND NOW HE GETS COMPENSATED, JUST LIKE WOMEN DO." SHE DIDN'T LIKE HEARING THAT FROM ME, BUT OH WELL. SHE FINALLY WENT TO COURT WITH HIM, AND AGREED TO PAY HIM A ONE TIME FEE OF $25,000, AND SHE NEVER HAD TO GIVE HIM ALIMONY AGAIN. IT GOES BOTH WAYS, BELIEVE IT OR NOT. AND, WHY SHOULDN'T A WOMAN GET ALIMONY? IT'S NOT A MATTER OF HER GOING OUT AND GETTING A JOB, OR ALL THAT BS. A GUY SHOULDN'T GET MARRIED IF HE THINKS IT'S GOING TO BE A HARDSHIP TO PAY CHILD SUPPORT, OR ALIMONY, IF THE MARRIAGE DOESN'T WORK OUT.— March 14, 2009 11:26 a.m.
The Biddy
What an enjoyable read! In 2nd grade, my tall, blonde attractive teacher was Ms. Sylvester. When I was in 3rd grade, she got married, and her name changed (I forget to what). I, too, was angered by this! You should rent NOTES ON A SCANDAL. Judi Dench plays (and won an Oscar for, I believe) playing an old spinster teacher. It's a good film.— March 14, 2009 4:37 a.m.
Greatest Sports Movies Ever
Update: I forgot about Heaven Can Wait. Not only should it be on a list of best sports movies, it's probably on my list of Top 50 movies of all-time, in any genre. Not the original movie, from the 30s. Or the crappy version with Chris Rock. The Warren Beatty version, with an amazing role by Jack Warden. Buck Henry was good, too. Oh hell, the entire cast (James Mason as head angel, Charles Grodin as the plotting killer, etc). Good music, too. The film holds up real well. Put it on your Netflix list.— March 14, 2009 3:23 a.m.
Drug Busts at Schools
I loved the photos that accompanied that piece, Fred.— March 14, 2009 3:18 a.m.
Music Notes...Metallica, Michael Jackson, and a Monkee in the Middle
Now, I will say there are two or three songs they did that aren't bad. I like For Whom the Bell Tolls. And, they do nice covers of Bob Seger, The Misfits, Sabbath, Motorhead, and my favorite being Queen's "Stone Cold Crazy." But, that double-bass drum of Lars is just so annoying. I'd take John Bonham, who could do all that with one foot, on one bass drum. Give me Zep any day of the week. They can do ballads, and rock your socks off, too. Also, the Ja Rule song. Why? That whole metal/rap thing is so played out. And from day one, I found it to be overrated. Is Aerosmith/Run DMCs "Walk this Way" really anything that special? The answer -- no. And, the guys in the band wear make-up now. What's up with that? You mention Megadeth, with former La Mesa resident and former Metallica member Dave Mustaine. That's a metal band I can get into! I dig their sound. As to whether or not they are nice guys...well, they sure didn't seem like it in that documentary, or in the countless interviews I've heard with Lars, that pretentious prick. Although, at a concert here in San Diego, my friend was in the front row, and he stole a necklace from James. They went on the air, with a DJ friend of mine (the band did), requesting the necklace back, as it was a family heirlom of some kind. My friend promptly returned it, and the band was real nice about it he said. So yeah, when you meet people in person, they're generally nice. What band is going to be a bunch of jerks to their fans? Unless, of course, they download their music illegally. Then Metallica would send them to jail!— March 14, 2009 3:16 a.m.