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
SDGE Lobbyist Said to be Innocent, Reinstated
"I saw it. I gave it an "F" because he screwed it up." Sigh.... There is just no pleasing some people! ;)— November 5, 2009 1:51 p.m.
SDGE Lobbyist Said to be Innocent, Reinstated
SP said: "You must be some sort of Duvall apologist to keep sliming the lobbyist." ??? That is just bizarre. If the lobbyist is implicated, that makes Duvall MORE culpable, not less. ========================================== SP said: "A conviction of a crime that involves moral turpitude, including any misdemeanor conviction, will stay with you until the day you die. It causes a LOT of damage to you." Since when does failing to fill out a form rise to the level of moral turpitude? Most misdemeanors do NOT involve moral turpitude (even some felonies don't). There are members of virtually EVERY profession that have suspended misdemeanor convictions, including defense contractors with Top Secret clearances (I know a few). Are you just making this stuff up? =========================================== SP said: "you are wrong about the lobbyist" How does anything you said about Graham answer any questions about the lobbyist? Do you know her personally? Do you have some other info other than what I have read in statements from her or her lawyer? ========================================== SP said: "graham was under investigation for at LEAST the 2 years prior to her GUILTY plea." Again with the "2 years" theme. Is that a magical time frame for you? Again, she emphatically stated she did nothing unethical LAST FRIDAY. Deal with it. She plead to the misdemeanor 6 months ago, not 2 years. What actually DID happen 2 years ago (one and a half years before her plea), was that the CCDC gave Graham a $65,000 bonus because “Nancy did an outstanding job in a difficult year of transition with some extraordinary challenges,”, according to Fred Maas (Sept, 2007). It was just over a year ago that she resigned, and the investigations were in force. Don't get me wrong, I believe that Graham is guilty as sin.— November 5, 2009 1:35 p.m.
SDGE Lobbyist Said to be Innocent, Reinstated
A general rule of courtesy for SDaniels and other posters here: Don't use vague and lengthy language Leaving others vexing, especially since labeling others by basically yelling invectives stifles this symposium.— November 5, 2009 12:55 p.m.
SDGE Lobbyist Said to be Innocent, Reinstated
antigeekess said: "Can we not be such an anal-retentive control freak, and remember that we're on a rather silly public message board?" Well, you felt compelled to interject yourself into a conversation in which you were not involved, so no, apparently "we" cannot. This forum is actually not that silly, and tends to be pretty informative (Even SurfPup!).— November 5, 2009 12:18 p.m.
SDGE Lobbyist Said to be Innocent, Reinstated
OR, SP started us down the ridiculous road of parsing the sentence of Graham because it is much easier for him to do that then to explain his strange yet steadfast defense of the lobbyist in the Duvall scandal. Can we please remember what is the point of this thread? The denials by the lobbyist and her attorney are clearly crafted to say absolutely nothing, a fact that SP blithely ignored in his charge to argue this (and other) meaningless tangents.— November 5, 2009 10:34 a.m.
SDGE Lobbyist Said to be Innocent, Reinstated
Don said: "I concluded at that time that CCDC probably knew but didn't care, since San Diego doesn't worry about such conflicts -- in fact, thrives on them." Don, Pat Flannery had some excellent articles on Graham that hinted strongly at the fact she was not hired after a nationwided search (as claimed), but rather the Related company had her put in place to do their work San Diego. There was also speculation on her relationships beyond Related, to include Manchester and Lennar.— November 5, 2009 9:06 a.m.
SDGE Lobbyist Said to be Innocent, Reinstated
Surf Pup, One more FYI re. Graham; You said "Nancy Graham PLED GUILTY to conflict of interest charges." In fact, she plead no contest to failing to file a statement of economic interest. That is hardly the same thing, and is an extremely minor charge. Even that minor charge only resulted in a suspended sentence, so essentially not even that much really happened.— November 5, 2009 8:59 a.m.
SDGE Lobbyist Said to be Innocent, Reinstated
Surf Pup said "First SD, now you, can't a pup catch a break here?" You've missed or ignored virtually every reference I have made so far, so it doesn't surprise me that you missed this one as well. I'll let somebody else explain the significance of what I wrote. BTW, nobody really cares the technical difference between pleading guilty and no contest. My point (which you completely ignored) was that Graham was in San Diego LAST FRIDAY making her claim of no unethical actions on her part. You like to go off on unrelated tangents that have nothing to do with the question at hand, and then shout Aha! Does your wife actually even listen to you anymore, or does she mostly just nod her head condescendingly and say "yes dear".— November 5, 2009 8:50 a.m.
SDGE Lobbyist Said to be Innocent, Reinstated
Pistol Pete said: "I pled Nolo Contendre on my Armed Robbery charge..." Dude, the first rule of robbery is to only use your legs, to avoid that charge.— November 5, 2009 8:41 a.m.
SDGE Lobbyist Said to be Innocent, Reinstated
Don said: "At least according to Duvall's revised statement, it was BOASTING about spanking that got him in trouble, not necessarily spanking." Full disclosure: I would like to make it clear that Surf Puppy was only boasting about spanking me, and that no actual spanking ever took place. This ordeal has been a professional and personal nightmare. My reputation, my job, and my exemplary career have all been placed in jeopardy by Surf Puppy's disgusting remarks. I am considering my legal recourse.— November 4, 2009 7:01 p.m.