Well, not really videotape. But anyway, here it is:
Let’s note a few things.
1. Uh, how many times does our Board of Supervisors issue a proclamation when somebody leaves the Chronicle? Who was behind this proclamation? Would most journalists be so proud to be honored for years of fawning coverage?
2. Did Supervisor John Avalos really go on a “rant?” And didn’t the topic have to do with Chuck, you know, purportedly, misquoting Avalos?
3. Did John Avalos really “slam” his microphone down? (I don’t know for sure, but I didn’t see it. Of course, neither did Chuck. Maybe I’d say Avalos pushed down or turned off the mic?)
5. Hey, I could go on and on. And he’s not even being honest when he says, well, that’s how I look at things. I’ll leave you with this, Gentle Reader – two bits on the wasteful expensive Central Subway. One, written before City Hall told Chuck how to feel and the other after. He was like Donald Trump on the Twitter, contradicting himself, seemingly without without realizing, and certainly without acknowledging…
“There’s really only one question to ask about the proposal to bore a light-rail subway deep under the heart of downtown San Francisco. You’re kidding, right?“
“Just the initial math makes your head hurt. Basically it works out to somewhere between $1.22 billion and $1.4 billion for an underground railway that runs for less than two miles and has only three stops. That’s not a transit system, it’s a model railroad.“
“Throw in a few of the inevitable cost overruns and this could work out to a billion dollars a mile.”
“No matter. This is the kind of big, splashy project that city officials love to put their name on.”
“Basically, the argument seems to boil down to this – we’ve got the money (as if federal tax dollars grow on trees), the Chinatown community is behind it, why not build it? Oh, let me count some of the reasons.”
“But, critics say, a stop on Market beneath which BART and other Muni lines already run might have made this whole thing an easier sell. That would have created an opportunity for a single station where riders could make connections between regional and local trains, almost like Grand Central Terminal in New York. Instead, riders will have to walk all the way up to Union Square.”
“Oh, and did I mention that in order to get under the BART tube, the subway station at Union Square will have to be at least 95 feet below the surface. That’s nine stories.”
“What is it about that image of deep, underground dirt-munching machines in earthquake country that makes me wince?”
“A subway will take traffic off some of the busiest streets in the city – try riding Muni on Stockton Street in the morning – and provide quick north-south access across the city, and it’s mostly paid for with federal funds. Who wouldn’t like something like that?”
“Progressive wingof San Francisco’s Democratic Party”
Chuck should just use the terms left of center and right of center, but he doesn’t and here’s why this is a problem. It’s ’cause, especially lately, people in the more dominant “wing,” what he calls the moderates, self-identify as progressive.
2. “The beginning of a Golden Age of politics for the far left”
So see how that works? What he should call the left he calls the far left because he’s not part of it – instead he’s a member of the dominant political faction. Also, this is what you call a straw dog. Who was promising a golden age for the far left? Exactly nobody.
3. “Tenderloin Housing Clinic Director Randy Shaw”
Oh that guy – here’s the link that Chuck et. al. can’t see clear to link to. Of course Randy Shaw, cited positively by Chuck, inconveniently defines what Chuck would call a moderate as a progressive. “Every time I update this race between two progressive candidates (Josh Arce and Hillary Ronen)…” See?
15. “Mayor Ed Lee, who didn’t want the job in the first place.”
Is this really true? If he didn’t want the job, then why did he take it? If the plan was that he’d be an “interim” Mayor, then why did he lie about it and stay on? (He was appointed Mayor because Gavin Newsom decided he wouldn’t leave town to start his new gig on the date what’s burned into our constitution, oh well.) Anyway, take a look at the first Gavin video above to see how an access journalist* like Chuck gets born. The sucking up gets going fast and furious, and sometimes things you used to mock become oh so wonderful.
16. “I came here in 1980…”
Well, actually he came here in 2010 – spent most of his time, a couple decades or so, far off in an east bay bedroom community, NTTAWWT. But that’s prolly where he’d be more, uh, comfortable.
17. “He’s not such a bad guy…”
Totally not the issue. You just should have fucking done your job better, that’s all. You know, after you were done with the sports.
Almost finished here, like forever, just one more:
Oh, this was Chuck’s mission statement, to troll Frisco? News to me. But perhaps not surprising. And “inspire,” what?
20 (BONUS!). “His book ‘The Devil’s Chessboard: Allen Dulles, the CIA and the Rise of America’s Secret Government’ was a New York Times bestseller.”
Wow, man, this is what David Talbot is doing lately? Well that’s different. Let’s hope he keeps his column local and steers clear of national topics, cause this JFK-conspiracy/cover up-leads-directly-to-President-Trump is a little out there. (IRL, Oswald had a thing about shooting at authority figures, like General Walker, and with the same rifle JFK, and then with a handgun Officer Tippit, all in 1963, all by his lonesome. This is true whether DT writes a book about the CIA or RFK or whatever, or not.) But that’s another can of worms.
Anyway, I’m thinking most of the big errors in the Chronicle came from CW Nevius, so if he’s happy leaving this seems like a win-win.
P.S. Sometimes the transit cops keep working even though it’s dinner time, so let’s try to pay for _all_ our MUNI fares in future, even if we consider ourselves big shots, OK? ‘Cause this isn’t a good look.
*And it’s not just that. He’d then go to mindlessly cheer lead for whomever was feeding him tidbits of news. So, writing from Walnut Creek, CA or wherever he’s all, “Holding the America’s Cup race in San Francisco is a wonderful opportunity without a downside. It is a win-win that will bring cargo bags of cash to the Bay Area and revitalize the southern waterfront.” And the plan back then was to have an America’s Cup here every three or four years. But after the inevitable “downsides” came along one after the other, SFGov decided it didn’t want to play ball with Larry Ellison after all. And who was slavishly following along for a good half-decade? One CW Nevius. And then, after Larry Ellison “abandoned” us, we got this last year:
“#rubbingitin Can’t confirm this is Larry Ellison’s boat but if so kinda rude to fly Bermuda flag. Site of next Am Cup”
So it goes from here-just-take-our-land-with-99-year-leases, Larry to Larry-does-everything-wrong. But Larry wasn’t being “kinda rude” as that’s not his yacht, and that’s not the “Bermuda flag,” and even if it was you can’t just jump to conclusions / read into things like this. Sorry Chuck. (It’s actually a great thing that Larry took his little boat race Someplace Else – let’s focus on the positives, m’kay?)
Anyway, the driver stops in the middle of McAllister, drops off his load, and then idly chitchats with bodega operators while his minitrucks idles – this makes the block look like a crime scene, if only temporarily.
On newsstands now, ‘neath pop star! and look chic!
(And look, this isn’t a very special weapon for her, it’s just an “EVERYDAY GUN.”)
You’d think the hand model would have a finger or two on the trigger, but no, for some reason.
Now don’t try buying one in California as it’s considered a sawed-off shotgun:
“Though Taurus deliberately designed the Judge to fire shotshells, the Judge does not qualify as a “short-barreled shotgun” under the National Firearms Act of 1934 as its rifled barrel makes it a regular handgun. However, the Judge is considered a short-barreled shotgun under California state law, which has a broader definition of “short-barreled shotgun,” and the Judge is thus illegal to possess in that state.“
Anyway, this was quite an arresting image as I passed by the magazine rack…
“Rogue waves (also known as freak waves, monster waves, episodic waves, killer waves, extreme waves, and abnormal waves) are large and spontaneous surface waves that occur far out in open water, and can be extremely dangerous, even to large ships such as ocean liners.”
Ocean Beach aint in open water, right?
So SFGov spokesmodels should pick a different adjective.
How about sneaker wave? You know, the kind that sneak up on the unwary. Or sleeper wave, for the sleepyheaded mariner. Or set wave, if you’re a surfer.
I suppose, if you don’t know what you’re doing, then you could try to pass the buck by calling this a rogue wave (or an Act of God). But that would just go to show that you didn’t know what you’re doing.
“In an innovative and clever legal maneuver, the city attorney’s office is asking the courts to treat the city like any other property owner and allow it to sue for damages to pay for graffiti cleanup.”
And that process ended up with a six-figure judgment, mostly for attorney fees that we spent in order to get the six figure judgment:
The problem with this that graffiti tagger Terry Cozy is never going to pay us back for all the attorney fees, obviously not before the now-passed February 2016 “deadline” but, equally obviously, not after either.
The amount of effort spent to collect on this uncollectable person is astounding. Check for yourself here. How about $149K in attorney fees, so far, as of January 2016, creating documents such as this:
So this declaration proves up that the San Francisco Examiner had to pay $100-something to repair a graffiti’ed ‘Xam newsbox. Man, this looks like a lot of work, on a fruitless task. JMO.
Anyway, here’s where Nevius was wrong with his mindless cheerleading:
This kind of action isn’t “innovative” since it’s been done in the past. Let’s check back on the case of Carlos Rivera from a decade ago, back when SFGov was only half as big. It’s the exact same same approach – let’s sock it to these taggers with a huge judgment, that will show them! Or, in the words of Chuck: “Put that in your spray can.”
This kind of action isn’t necessarily “clever” since we’re spending a ton of money to run up the score on a defendant who’s never going to pay us back five figures, much less six figures. Does this make sense? $66,167.64 of PRINCIPAL but with $149,067.00 in ATTORNEY FEES?