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
Dalai Lama causes a stir at UCSD
My wife and I did our graduate work at SDSU. I don't remember that many foreign students, at least those that would have been obvious. We only actually knew two. They were sisters from South America, Argentina I think, but it has been a long time, nearly 40 yrs. I haven't been near the campus in a long time, probably close to 15 years at least, but I have no doubts it is different now. I don't know what the SDSU specific rate is, but the total number of foreign student in the whole system is less than half of that in the UC system, only 3 or 4 percent. Like don bauder, I take no issue in general with foreign student at state universities. You are of course entitled to your opinion. I just happen to have a different one.— February 20, 2017 8:53 a.m.
Thousands to Faulconer: sanctuary city now
I didn't bother to look, but I would say that you are using the U3 rate. My guess is that the above comment was referring to the U6 rate, which while still not the true rate, is still much more accurate than the U3 figure.— February 20, 2017 8:35 a.m.
Dalai Lama causes a stir at UCSD
don bauder, I agree with you 100 percent. While in high school my wife had the opportunity to go to France as a foreign exchange student. When she had the opportunity to return in college to study for a year, she jumped at it. She often said it was probably the most important year in her education. It had enough of an impact the when our daughter had the same type of opportunity, she didn't need much encouraged to take advantage of it.— February 20, 2017 8:24 a.m.
Dalai Lama causes a stir at UCSD
Perhaps I should clarify my point. Ninety one percent of the student in the UC system are American students. Only 2/3 of those are from in state. We moved to San Diego in 1976, so having been a taxpayer for the majority of that time, both my California tax dollars as well as my federal tax dollars, have gone to support the UC system. And as, such I have no more problem with the 9 percent of the foreign students than I do with the 30 percent out of state students, all of whom pay triple the tuition of in state students. That is it, the only point I was making. As someone who has paid their fair share, I don’t have a problem with foreign students getting an education in the UC or Cal State system. I also don’t believe that foreign students in the UC/CalState system are what is responsible for a lack in college education for today’s youth. It is, I believe, are far more complicated problem. As to your feelings towards California’s universities turning into "research universities", I really don’t have an opinion either way because, in all honesty, far from being even slightly offended, I simply don’t care either way. I mean no offense to someone such as yourself who does, it is just that at this point in my life, I really don’t care either way.— February 20, 2017 8:11 a.m.
Dalai Lama causes a stir at UCSD
When I was in college, the state funded about 90% of the UC system. That was almost 40 yrs ago. Now the state provides less than half of that; the last figure I saw was about 43 percent of last year's funding. So, yes, it is partly taxpayer funded. But it is not as if foreign student get in for free. Resident student tuition this year is about $13,500, while foreign student pay a "nonresident supplemental tuition" of almost $27K, so full tuition is $40k, so they pay a price to attend. BTW, less than 10% of the student population in made up of international students. FYI, the freshman admission rate last year for UCSD was about 35percent. The only schools lower were UCLA and Berkeley, with rates half of that.— February 19, 2017 7:47 a.m.
Trump/Navarro saber-rattling has already shaken up China
don bauder It's not my "account". It is fact. The North agreed to a de-escalation of Viet Cong activities in South Vietnam and in return, Johnson agreed to stop all bombing runs over North. And it was South Vietnam that backed out of the talks in Paris. It's in the history books. As for the details on the who, what, when, where, how and why, it was all made public years ago thru the declassified records at the LBJ Library. At the time, there was even a story written by Christian Science Monitor correspondent in Saigon that had the details, but Johnson convinced the paper to only print a story that South Vietnam's President Nguyen Van Thieu decided on his own to hold out until after the election. LBJ was afraid of the country's reaction if people found out that he had the FBI investigating Nixon, including surveillance, wire taps and the whole enchilada. As I said, the information has been public for years, and most recently, within the last few weeks, I have read articles in the NYT and the Smithsonian on the subject. And the fact remains that Paris talks were on the ropes before November 1968 because the North Vietnamese were not serious about ending the war at that time and South Vietnamese President Thieu was completely unwilling to participate in talks that included the NLF, the communist party that was trying to overthrow the his government.— February 14, 2017 11:19 a.m.
Trump/Navarro saber-rattling has already shaken up China
Let me correct you on a couple of points. In late October of 1968, Hanoi did agree to a de-escalation of Viet Cong activities in South Vietnam and in return, Johnson agreed to stop all bombing runs over North Vietnam, Operation Rolling Thunder. These concessions would allow the peace talks to begin in Paris. So on October 31, just 5 days before the election, Johnson announced the bombing halt of North Vietnam, effective November 1. But there was never a "deal" with the North Vietnamese to end the war at that point. Johnson did have a transcript of one of Nixon's people telling Hanoi that Nixon didn’t run the war and didn’t get them into it, but he could be a lot more considerate of them because Johnson was pretty inflexible one what concessions he wanted. But it was not the North Vietnamese government who were told to wait for a Nixon victory for a better plan. It was the South Vietnamese government who was told to walk away from the Paris peace negotiations. Nixon had already set up a secret back-channel using Anna Chennault, who was a senior campaign adviser. When he heard about the concessions by the North Vietnamese, Chennault was sent to the South Vietnamese embassy with message for the South Vietnamese government to withdraw from the talks, refuse to deal with Johnson, and if Nixon was elected, they would get a much better deal. A couple of days later, the FBI intercepted a cable between Chennault and the South Vietnamese Embassy reinforcing that message. So on the night before his announcement of the halt to the bombing, Johnson found out that the South Vietnamese were pulling out of the peace talks. And after Johnson made his announcement, Saigon, issued a statement saying that the United States had acted unilaterally in its decision to halt the bombing. It is just my opinion and opinions vary, but while those involved were most certainly guilty of violating the Logan Act, I don't necessarily agree that it was treason. Between Article III, Section 3 of the Constitution and a couple of other laws created by Congress, an act of treason has been pretty specifically defined. And I am not sure this fits the bill. Not saying definitively that it doesn't, just not sure it does. Again: Just my opinion Opinions vary— February 14, 2017 8:50 a.m.
Doug Manchester to be Bahama Papa for U.S.?
don bauder The US hasn't had and Ambassador to the Bahamas in several years, since sometime during the first Obama administration, I believe. Nor more than a week or 10 days ago, I read on article on renewing an agreement having to do with some kind of undersea testing in the Atlantic, and the current chargè d'affaires, an Obama appointee was still there. BTW, the reason there is no ambassador is because the Senate has held by interim appointees.— February 9, 2017 2:53 p.m.
Trump/Navarro saber-rattling has already shaken up China
I agree with your disagreement. This country has survived a revolution, a civil war, Pearl Harbor, the violent protest of the 1960's and the Nixon presidency, 9/11 and the assassination of four of it's Presidents. It will survive Trump. It may get ugly for a while, almost assuredly so, I think, but it will survive Trump, and as with the things incidents I mentioned above, will emerge stronger than ever. There's an old saying. Democracy is the worst form of government... except for all the others.— February 9, 2017 2:35 p.m.
Trump/Navarro saber-rattling has already shaken up China
Since you posted, or at least attempted to post, the link, it should be a fair assumption that you actually read the article. It seems from your comment that you did not. So let me clarify for you with what you would have found out: "Section 4 of the 25th Amendment has never been invoked in reality, though it’s a staple of thriller fiction." It would take VPOTUS , a majority of sitting Cabinet secretaries AND a two-thirds majority in both houses for such an attempted coup. Yes, I said coup. Because unless POTUS, not just this one, but any, is actually diagnosed and CONFIRMED to have an affliction, either mental or physical, that prevents him or here from fulfilling the oath of office, it would be a coup. And that CANNOT HAPPEN. In other words, your "hope" is merely an unfulfilled fantasy.— February 9, 2017 2:21 p.m.