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
Mary Jo White fretted about "aggressive" regulator
Rolling Stone has ALWAYS had liberal politics as one of it's focuses. I mean, how could you have people like Hunter S. Thompson, Tom Wolfe as writers and NOT. Then throw in the likes of Jan Morris, P.J. O'Rourke, William Greide on economics, well you get the idea. I will say that in the late'90's, RS did move more towards pop-culture e rather than counter culture, much to the disdain of most long time readers, such as ourselves. For some reason, Jan Wenner dumped longtime managing editor Robert Love in favor of some douche from FHM magazine.. Finally, maybe5-6 yrs ago, someone pulled their head out and got back on track. Hiring Taibbi and Micheal Hastings sure didn't hurt. BTW, I think today, Hipsters would be considered as counterculture. If you're not sure of what a hipster is, like me, here are a couple of things: http://www.nytimes.com/2010/11/14/books/review/Gr… http://www.adbusters.org/magazine/79/hipster.html— February 5, 2013 9:01 a.m.
San Diego's great red light camera rebellion
surfpuppy619, get over it. It wasn't in the '90's. Table one, following page 4: http://www.leg.state.nv.us/Division/Research/Publ… It was AB 27 in 1985. You are probably thinking of the change from secondary enforcement to primary enforcement, which took place on Jan. 1, 1993— February 5, 2013 8:23 a.m.
Mary Jo White fretted about "aggressive" regulator
Really, you ordered it on a Sunday and received it on a Monday?? What was the shipping method? I'd like to specify that method the next time I get something from Amazon.— February 4, 2013 9:35 p.m.
San Diego's great red light camera rebellion
Yeah, I know what you mean. It took me at least 20 seconds to go into Bing, type in "california manditory seatbelt law 1986" and find this: http://articles.latimes.com/1985-12-31/news/mn-26… BTW, if you're referring to the The National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act, that was in 1966. From that came the Automatic Occupant Protection Provision in in section 571.208 of Title 49 of the Code of Federal Regulations, which was announced by Sec Trans in 1984.— February 4, 2013 9:22 p.m.
San Diego's great red light camera rebellion
Well, technically, you are correct as I worded my statement incorrectly. The California Mandatory Seat Belt Law was officially enacted on Sept. 30, 1985 and was EFFECTIVE on 1 Jan, 1986. It was originally a secondary enforcement violation and the fine at the time was $20 for a first offense and $50 for a subsequent violation. Waivers were give to medical personel, peace officers and newspaper delivery and rural mail carriers. At one point in 1986, 26 states and D.C. had mandatory seatbelt laws. However, the laws in Massachusetts and Nebraska were repealed their voters in the November 1986 elections. I don't recal the bill number, but it was introduced and sponsored by Willie Brown, who was also Assembly Speaker at the time. Interestingly enough, there was a "grace period" in which motorists found in violation will only be warned and not cited. CHP and LAPD/SD agreed on a 60 day period. The SDCSD apparently only gave a 7 day grace period. What bastards!!! LOL— February 4, 2013 11:05 a.m.
San Diego's great red light camera rebellion
It was enacted 1986. The minimum 1st offense fine was increased to a base of $142 in 2010 The state legislature passed a bill several years ago, 8 or 10, that deleted the inclusion of penalty assessments and court costs in determining the maximum fine so I would guess that's how yours ended up at $214.— February 3, 2013 10:22 p.m.
San Diego's great red light camera rebellion
So why not just wear the damned seat belt and not get ticketed in the first place???— February 2, 2013 2:47 p.m.
Yeah, we're pretty sure Warm Bodies star Teresa Palmer was grown in a lab
She wasn't grown in a lab. I mean come on. Seriously. Have you never seen Weird Science? THAT'S how it was done!!! LOL— January 31, 2013 11:21 a.m.
La Costa's Merv Adelson admits mob ties
Interesting. Much of the story told in the Vanity Fair article, no mob stuff though, was previously in an article in Variety about 7 yrs ago. At that time his then 10yr old daughter was also living with him in Santa Monica and he also had an office in Santa Monica. If I remember correctly, it was in one of the Water Garden buildings which is a pretty nice place.— January 31, 2013 11:18 a.m.
Mickelson gambling stories make rounds again
Not to be a jerk, OK maybe I am being one, but why do you think Michelson's gambling is significant, regardless of what his recent remarks were? He's just another rich "athlete" / celebrity who makes more in a year than the average taxpayer will see in his lifetime and thinks he deserves more. The only difference with Lefty is that he publicly stuck his foot in his mouth and now looks like a complete fool. Let me put this way. Why would anyone consider anything he says or does in regards to his personal life significant? So he shot his mouth off. I mean really, who cares? I don't, but I guess that maybe you do. Do you think there is a tie in between his recent comments and maybe some money problems due to current gambling issues? If that's the case, spell it out for us. Otherwise, to me it has no significance at all. BTW, even though I am someone who admires good use of sarcasm, I must confess that my "knowledge" of Mickelson's Ryder Cup travails wasn't "at my fingertips". Admittedly, anyone who follows the PGA and Ryder CUP knows of his uncanny ability to look like a complete amateur during the last few Ryder Cup matches and that he is the losingest US player ever. Fortunately though, the PGA and Ryder Cup, maintain a beautiful website, one which includes, oddly enough, the complete player records of everyone who has played even a single match, both for the US and European teams. Imagine that! Nothing like good research instead of talking out of ones ass, I always say.— January 31, 2013 10:49 a.m.