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
Could Brown reappoint unpopular Peevey?
Yeah, I read of this earlier this morning. But you left out 1 salient detail. Hill will introduce the measure when the Legislature reconvenes Dec. 1. As I said, nothing can be done until then. I read about the other emails on SFGate on Monday. BTW as of abou 1/2 hour ago, the point appears to be mute. Peevey has announced that he will step down at the end of his term: “I originally planned to make the following announcement at the CPUC’s regularly scheduled voting meeting on Oct. 16, but instead I am moving the announcement to today to state that I will not seek reappointment to the CPUC,” commission President Michael Peevey said in a statement. “Twelve years as president is enough.” http://www.sfgate.com/news/article/CPUC-head-Mich…— October 9, 2014 11:51 a.m.
ISIS fighters caught at Mexico-U.S. border? Really?
And in other news, Generalissimo Francisco Franco is still dead.— October 9, 2014 9:16 a.m.
Could Brown reappoint unpopular Peevey?
"All Brown has to do is say that Peevey will not be renominated." don bauder, Yeah, I think I said that.— October 8, 2014 10:27 p.m.
Details not in the Diablo report
captd/founder Yeah I was hopeful of Picker too. But you might want to read this. Picker appears to be falling in line with the others. http://www.sfgate.com/default/article/CPUC-to-rul… You might also want to read this one. Take note of Picker's recent background. http://www.sfgate.com/default/article/Nominee-hop…— October 8, 2014 3:37 p.m.
Could Brown reappoint unpopular Peevey?
I would think that Mike Aguirre, of all people, would know that at this particular point in time that, while Peevey could by removed as President of the CPUC and/or Brown could ask for the resignations of both Peevey and Florio, neither can be fired. For either one of them to be involuntarily removed from office, both the State Senate and Assembly have to vote in favor of it( I don't remember right now if its a simple majority or not). But since both houses are out of session until December 1st, it is simply not possible at this time unless Brown would convince the Speaker and the President of the Senate to call everyone back into a special session, if that is even possible. That being said, at the very least Brown could publicly state his intention to replace Peevey instead of renominating him, if not publicly stating that he has requested both of their immediate resignations.— October 8, 2014 3:29 p.m.
Peace gives PG&E a chance
I remember reading last year around the holidays that she had moved back to Los Angeles to join a law firm as a partner. She had been working for GS, but I think she left them last summer— October 7, 2014 6:42 p.m.
Water worry: avocados
An interesting article concerning California's water woes: http://www.latimes.com/science/la-me-megadrought-…— October 6, 2014 7:36 a.m.
Deported U.S. military veterans activate in Tijuana
Tough talk for a troll. LOL— October 5, 2014 9:53 a.m.
Deported U.S. military veterans activate in Tijuana
Joesolo, I assume that you are or were a United States Marine, so thank you for your service. No, I have never served in any branch of the military. Both of my grandfathers did, my father did as did my father-in-law. My uncle, my father’s brother, did as well. He was a Navy pilot. He was shot down in 1970 and his name is on the West Wall. Also, the son of one of my closest friends did 3 tours in Iraq and one in Afghanistan. He now works as a civilian for the DOD at the Pentagon. Unless you were to see him in shorts, you couldn’t tell he has a prosthetic leg. So yes, I realize the danger and the sacrifice it takes to defend our country How do I know so much about what it takes to get deported and about immigration and citizenship? Don’t you know? It happens to be spelled out pretty well by USCIS. As for citizenship status and enlistment in the military, you do know what BEERs are, right? It was pretty easy to look them up on any of the service websites. My comment was to point out to the previous poster that that a non-U.S. Citizen and an illegal alien are 2 different things, and while a non-citizen CAN serve, an illegal alien CANNOT and it wasn’t very hard to find the correct info. At least it wasn’t hard for me. I hear what you are saying, but you are incorrect about one thing. While the law may indeed need to be changed, he did break the law as it stands: discharge of a firearm on to a vehicle. And I’ll stand by my previous comment. I can't fathom why anyone wanting to stay in this country and become/retain citizenship would commit a firearms violation like he did, or any other offense which could get him deported. It’s that simple. You were given rules to follow as a Marine and if you didn’t follow them, you knew you would have to suffer the consequences. This guy had rules to follow to gain and retain his citizenship, among them being to not commit a firearms offense or any of the other I listed. He didn’t follow them. As you said, people commit crimes and people pay for those crimes. Part of that payment was deportation. What if, when he discharged that firearm on to a vehicle, he had killed someone, maybe someone you knew. Would you still think he deserved to keep his citizenship? I don’t want anyone who came here, got their citizenship and committed one of those offenses, here, regardless of whether or not they served in the military. Do you want them in your neighborhood, the drug dealers, sex offenders, child abusers, wife beaters, etc? Because I don’t. All of the offenses listed are grounds for deportation, meaning they made him deportable. It was up to the judge to make the decision and he obviously felt the crime was seriously enough to warrant deportation. You can’t make an exception just because you don’t like the law as it is written.— October 3, 2014 10:51 a.m.
Hard time city
AlexClarke, there are those who would gladly take a little bit of something over a whole lot of nothing. Obviously, you must be one of those who don't need any help. Good for you.— October 1, 2014 8:59 a.m.