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
That Jokes Old
Nice. There's a version like this. It's something like: a priest and rabbi walk into a bar. The bartender just looks at them. They wonder why they aren't being asked what they want to drink, and the bartender says, "I'm waiting for the joke." Something like that. That's another weird thing about jokes. Often times, you'll see variations. A joke that is 50 years old, has been updated slightly. I have no problem with that.— August 3, 2008 12:34 p.m.
Equal Rights For Women? Thumbs Down!
Fred...I have no problem if a cop busts your teeth for no reason, being compensated. But, when someone sues the cops...like this gay guy that was shot for attacking the police. Well, it seems they don't have a case. When that is proven, they should have to pay the police, for filing a false claim. Or, when police and the state, have to pay someone wrongly accused during an investigation (and usually they are wrongly accused, because they acted guilty, lawyered up, and did other weird things instead of just answering questions honestly)...well, when the correct person is arrested, or dies, the state should seize EVERYTHING they own, to pay for said investigation (as you agreed with). Burn...it's a decent point, but I don't see a problem with a woman wanted to be treated with that chivalry that has been around for ages. A man that will open a door, pay for a meal, etc. There's a difference between that, and a woman that just wants a sugar daddy. But, I've had many jobs over the years, and I can honestly say, I've seen a different work ethic when it comes to men and women. And, many women have often admitted that to me as well. I'm not saying that means women should be paid less. I'm saying we pay each person based on the job they do. But, if surveys come out that show women make less, we don't freak out over why that is. Because, there are reasons for it. The woman, that inspired me to write that blog...probably doesn't realize, most female journalists, probably didn't gravitate toward film criticism, and that's why there are fewer film critics out there. I bet if she walked into one of the more popular film schools, it would probably be 70% male. Just like the percentage of film critics she complains about.— August 2, 2008 11:24 a.m.
The Cross Controversy
Oh, and your logic about not wanting religious people to vote, is horrible. You know why? If you go down that path, well, you wouldn't want anyone to vote. I played basketball with a guy, and he voted for George W. Bush. I asked him why (he doesn't know anything about politics; and he's a working guy, pulling in $50,000 a year, with a wife that works at a high school, and has two kids). He said, "He was involved in baseball, and I love baseball. And he knows a lot of important people. And, I think a president needs to know important people that can get things done." That was his logic, for voting Bush into office. Insane. There will be people voting for Obama this time around, simply because he's black. They will know NOTHING more about him, or McCain, then that one is a young black guy. And therefore, he gets there vote. Do they deserve to vote? To me, although I disagree with what hardcore religious people feel on issues (like abortion, church and state, etc)...at least they have a lot of issues they have opinions on deciding who they will vote for. They don't just look at skin color. A Republican would vote for a black Republican, over a white Democrat. Basically Fred, you're doing what people do that I hate. You only wnat people to vote, that feel the way you do. Therefore, relgious people to you, shouldn't be allowed to vote. Because they believe silly stories like that two of every kind of animal were on a big ark. And trust me dude, there's enough intelligent people in the world, that the right thing is going to be done in the long run. It doesn't matter if a Republican or Democrat gets in the White House. I mean, if a Republican was President the next 25 years, do you really think Roe v. Wade is going to be overturned? I doubt it.— August 2, 2008 1:39 a.m.
The Cross Controversy
Okay Fred, a few things. The cut off date: October 2, 1942. That's when it should be. Regarding me being an agnostic and a wussy, that is flawed logic. I'm an agnostic that leans more towards atheism than religion. I do believe in evolution. Nothing to "believe,"...science has pretty much proved all of that. I am just able to admit, that we don't really know, if there is a God. I think someone that is an atheist, and just thinks there's nothing. That when you die, that's it. Well, that's just as insane logic as a religious person thinking there's a man with a big long white beard, letting people in the pearly gates. Think about it. Neither of you know for sure. What agnostics think is....hey, we don't know. I do know this...it won't be like on South Park, where you get up "there," and someone says "Mormons. That was the religion that had it right." I think every religion is probably pretty far off base on how it is. But, I am willing to keep open the possibility that there is something else that happens once we die. I don't think it's reincarnation. I don't think, necessarily, that it's heaven the way we think of heaven to be. I just don't know. How you can consider that wussy, is beyond me. To me, "wussy" would be more for people that need religion, as a crutch. Because, life would be to hard for them to not believe that there is something better once they die. Or, they wouldn't be able to go on, after losing a loved one, or whatever. And again, "wussy" is a tough word to throw around. Some people just don't take those things very well, like losing a loved one to some disease, or a drunk driver, etc. If it makes them feel better, to think God has them reunited with all their other dead family members, hell, let them go on believing that. It only makes them enjoy life a bit more.— August 2, 2008 1:31 a.m.
Equal Rights For Women? Thumbs Down!
Well towel, the problem with your logic is you're saying "amount to nothing more than a housewife." There's nothing wrong with someone that is just a "housewife". My mom was "just a housewife" that raised three kids, cooked all our meals, cleaned the house, etc. I just saw some show on MSNBC tonight, where a female prison guard got beat up so bad....50 stitches over each eye, broken eye sockets and broken jaw, really messed up. She couldn't even return to the area she was attacked, without breaking down in tears. Now she has a job supervising vehicles that come into the prison, away from the prisoners. I wonder if she makes less than the men that have to face the prisoners. The prisoners that spit at them. That curse at them. That throw feces at them. I'll bet she does. Or, did she say, "You know what? I do a job that's a let less of a risk. Why don't you give me less pay." People always complain about job cuts and pay cuts, but it never happens the opposite way around. Sort of switching subjects, it's like when I get on that kick about wrongly accused people getting a big payday from the state. That anthrax guy killed himself. Well, apparently, the first person they suspected, sued and got millions, because his name was leaked to the media. Well, this guy that killed himself...will the police, or the state, get millions from his estate? If not, why? (Fred?)— August 2, 2008 1:24 a.m.
The Cross Controversy
I also think, if they're going to keep saying it's a "war memorial," then...I better start seeing signs of it showing other religious symbols. Last I checked, soldiers died defending this country that were other religions. But Fred, part of my point was...I think MOST athiests (I'm agnostic), don't really have a problem with the cross there. Or, they might have a problem with it, but not enough to sue or even really care if it stayed. Sometimes about a lawsuit to have it removed, bothers me on a small level. Even though I don't agree with the cross. I'll give you an example of why. A friend of a friend, owns a bar. They were sued because they didn't have the proper ramps for wheelchair access. Well, they were not sued by someone in a wheelchair that couldn't get in. It was from a lawyer that drives around, looking for businesses that are like this, and then he sues and settles with the businesses, and makes some quick cash. To me, that's not what laws are intended to do. So, my point with the cross is....if someone now, tried to put a cross on government land, no way. But, that cross has been there. I have no problem with it getting a free pass. I then do start to have a problem when the religious people tell us "Hey...it's not a cross." Well, then, why do they want it to stay? I'm sure they wouldn't be fighting for it to stay if, as you mentioned earlier, it was a huge marijuana leaf.— August 1, 2008 11:04 a.m.
Equal Rights For Women? Thumbs Down!
Well Fred, I'm not on board with you on this one. If a man chooses to do those things, so be it. I think a good boyfriend (husband), does those types of things. I remember dating a stripper (I was young and stupid), and she told me about a Charger who would come in and spend lots of money. He bought one dancer a car one time. Hey...that's his choice. If a man can work on a car, and she's having problems with her vehicle, fix it. Where I would use your argument, is when the housewife, says that a woman doing what she does...."taking care of the kids, making dinner, cleaning the house,"...24 hours a day, etc, would be paid $150,000 a year. They do those stories every few years. Well, that's when you whip out the point you just brought up. At my 20 year high school reunion, I also thought how a woman doesn't have to have a job, and nobody bats an eye. She could just be married to someone that has a good job, and she's at home with the kids. Men can't do that. But again, that's between the man and the woman, and what they choose to do raising their kids and their income, etc. But, my point is, women that go on and on about making less for doing the "same job." When, all indications are, that isn't the case.— August 1, 2008 10:38 a.m.
The Cross Controversy
Good point, as always, Fred. I think what my point was...I don't have a problem with money saying "In god we trust." In the future, maybe we don't print that. In the future, if a courthouse is built, we can leave all the religious things off the walls. But, if something is already up on the walls, I have no problem with it being "grandfathered" in. If religious people have "faith", and they believe in a God they don't see, or ever have proof there is, I would say that the cross bar of the cross, should be sawed off. It would no longer be a cross, to most people. And, the religious people could "imagine" that bar still going across the thing creating a cross, and it can have a religious meaning to them, without "offending" others. Of course, they probably don't like that idea.— August 1, 2008 10:29 a.m.
Equal Rights For Women? Thumbs Down!
Well Kinneas, tell me what you don't agree with (other than bad spelling). It was almost 3 a.m. and as I've said, I don't use spell check or care, when it comes to blogs. I'm typing fast, off the top of my head. I think I'm making it obvious, that I'm not backing that theory up with facts, just what I think. But if you disagree, can you throw some facts out there? Tell me why you think it is, that women make less than men. Or, why a woman would work at a place that pays her less. And, why women that have been questioned on the topic, say that their male counterparts have chosen to stay hours later and work the overtime, which they didn't want to work. One woman said they wanted to get home to spend time with their family. Women and men are different. When it comes to work, also. So, maybe that's why men "make more" for doing "the same job." But, you don't dispute that. You just say I don't deserve a blog. Yet, you say Carolla is a "comedian." Guess what? He started out as a carpenter and boxing trainer, who used to call into an L.A. radio station to say funny things. What makes him more credible then me to comment on anything? In fact, I could argue I've done just as much "comedy writing" as Adam...both for radio, print media, commercials, etc. But that's not what we're talking about right now. So, let's hear your facts.— August 1, 2008 10:18 a.m.
The Cross Controversy
Wow, that Inquisition, followed by the Mel Brooks ref. Nice. I don't think the cross was originally a war memorial, which is kind of bothersome in a way. It somehow became that, in an effort to keep the cross there (I believe I read that, but not positive).— August 1, 2008 2:03 a.m.