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.
Susan Davis debates GOP challenger almost 1/3 her age
If term limits were imposed it would be term limits for all districts so voters wouldn't have to worry about how electing a new Representative might be a disadvantage for their region. Good point.— October 14, 2018 6:30 a.m.
Susan Davis debates GOP challenger almost 1/3 her age
Great point Visduh. Murtaugh's candidacy and this article push back against age and gender related stereotypes and prejudices that are out there. Thinking of the awful public comments made after the 2016 Republican election victory, people wishing "old white men" would die. If Murtaugh wins who will they blame then?— October 14, 2018 6:26 a.m.
Susan Davis debates GOP challenger almost 1/3 her age
Gloria was sitting front row at the debate. Perhaps scouting a potential future debate opponent?— October 14, 2018 6:20 a.m.
Susan Davis debates GOP challenger almost 1/3 her age
Hi Monaghan. I don't think the headline is meant to be ageist. I think it's meant to highlight an interesting contrast. It's not too often you see people with such a large age gap debating each other. That's why I highlighted age in my article, and I assume that's the same reason Times and Huffington highlighted it. Is your impression that it's ageist against Davis for being too old or against Murtaugh for being too young or both?— October 13, 2018 5:30 p.m.
At first Fuchida had no regrets about Pearl Harbor
Hey Patrick, take it easy man. The headline was my idea and it presupposes none of the things you are imagining. It actually presupposes nothing. It asks a question based on the text of the bill at issue. The text of the bill specifically bans the sale of counseling services that would help a person seeking a change from gay to straight. It does not also specify a ban against the sale of services helping someone transition from straight to gay, thus the question, "Does sexual orientation change go only one way?" It's a very objective title in response to the bill. A perfectly relevant response to the question could be "there is no such thing as sexual orientation change" and you made that point. Say you are correct, then again, why doesn't the bill specifically ban sexual orientation change efforts in both directions? Why ban it in only one direction? A partisan talking point headline on one side would be "California's 'must stay gay' bill" or on the other side, "the ban on psychological torture bill." The article and the reasons presented from the side opposing the bill have nothing to do with children, camps, physical or sexual torture, or the way people are born. I'm not disinterested in people's experiences. I'm very interested in them. This particular article is about a particular bill that decides whether adults can choose to spend their money for counseling services to help with a change they want. An earlier version of the bill would have also banned the sale of books dealing with the same subject. I presented both sides of the issue. One side says the bill protects lgbt people from a fraudulent business practice. The other side says the bill violates the right of lgbt adults to spend their money as they choose and seek changes they want. The bill has now been dropped entirely. One thing you stated is quite outrageous. Describing the therapy consenting adults seek out for themselves as "psychological torture" seems to be a stretch, but I gave that viewpoint the benefit of the doubt and quoted Wiener's opinion on that. But it's pure fantasy to say this bill was banning the "sexual torture of children." Are you saying without this bill it's legal in California to sexually torture children? Of course sexually torturing children is already illegal. Of course none of the legislators or activists who opposed this bill support sexual torture of children. Such a horrible thing has nothing to do with this story. I can't believe the Reader would publish such a reckless and obviously false characterization.— September 13, 2018 11:19 a.m.
At first Fuchida had no regrets about Pearl Harbor
Hi Dan, Thanks for sharing the locker story. Stu didn't mention that one to me. He did tell me about his relationship with Fuchida and so many other remarkable things. I wish I could write a story about them all. Eric— September 13, 2018 10:20 a.m.
Spit at in Del Taco
interesting idea. kind of like a scarecrow, or places that have an audio recording of a predatory bird high in the food chain repeating over and over to keep the pigeons, etc.. away.— September 2, 2018 4:17 p.m.
Spit at in Del Taco
yes— August 31, 2018 3:56 p.m.
Does sexual orientation change go only one way?
https://www.sacbee.com/latest-news/article2174291…— August 31, 2018 3:55 p.m.
Does sexual orientation change go only one way?
the bill has been withdrawn. https://www.sacbee.com/latest-news/article2174291…— August 31, 2018 3:54 p.m.