Posts Tagged ‘Amendment’

San Francisco’s Inexplicable Ban on Guns in Bus Advertising is … Inexplicable? Compare These Two Ads

Thursday, May 30th, 2013

Here is part of the real poster for The Other Guys, a lesser  effort from Will Farrell, a buddy-cop comedy from 2010.

See? He’s a nerd cop with a Prius police car but now he’s shooting a gun:

Now, via SF Weekly, here’s the MUNI bus ad version of that ad, ’cause Guns Is Bad:

SO the SFMTA don’t like guns. Check.

But here’s the latest bus ad from MUNI, showing what, an IDF soldier bayoneting a Palestinian youth with an Uzi or something?

Joe Eskenazi of SF Weekly explicates here.

I’ll tell you, I’m curious to see how MUNI censors the ads for the next buddy cop action comedy to come out of Hollywood.

In the meantime. everybody should buy guns!

Lots and lots and lots of guns.

Holy Toledo! Official San Francisco Contractor AutoReturn Advertises Bible Verses While Towing Cars in the 415?

Friday, November 9th, 2012

WTF is this? Is this a tow truck towing cars in the Financial under authority of the contract AutoReturn has with SFGov?

I think so!

And yet, in addition to charging you $500 for towing away your ride for being just 13 minutes late, AutoReturn wants to be involved with giving you a lecture from the King James.

Check it: 

Click to expand

I cry foul.

For the record, PSALM 23:

The Lord is my Shepherd; I shall not want.
He maketh me to lie down in green pastures:
He leadeth me beside the still waters.
He restoreth my soul:
He leadeth me in the paths of righteousness for His name’ sake.

Yea, though I walk through the valley of the shadow of death,
I will fear no evil: For thou art with me;
Thy rod and thy staff, they comfort me.
Thou preparest a table before me in the presence of mine enemies;
Thou annointest my head with oil; My cup runneth over.

Surely goodness and mercy shall follow me all the days of my life,
and I will dwell in the House of the Lord forever.

And then I’ll tow your car.

Sometimes, I just don’t know…

“The colonel’s hostility softened gradually as he applied himself to details. “Now, I want you to give a lot of thought to the kind of prayers we’re going to say. I don’t want anything heavy or sad. I’d like you to keep it light and snappy, something that will send the boys out feeling pretty good. Do you know what I mean? I don’t want any of this Kingdom of God or Valley of Death stuff. That’s all too negative. What are you making such a sour face for?”

“I’m sorry, sir,” the chaplain stammered. “I happened to be thinking of the Twenty-third Psalm just as you said that.”

“How does that one go?”

“That’s the one you were just referring to, sir. ‘The Lord is my shepherd; I—’”

“That’s the one I was just referring to. It’s out. What else have you got?”

“‘Save me, O God; for the waters are come in unto—’”

“No waters,” the colonel decided, blowing ruggedly into his cigarette holder after flipping the butt down into his combed-brass ash tray. “Why don’t we try something musical? How about the harps on the willows?”

“That has the rivers of Babylon in it, sir,” the chaplain replied. “‘…there we sat down, yea, we wept, when we remembered Zion.’”

“Zion? Let’s forget about that one right now. I’d like to know how that one ever got in there. Haven’t you got anything humorous that stays away from waters and valleys and God? I’d like to keep away from the subject of religion altogether if we can.”

The chaplain was apologetic. “I’m sorry, sir, but just about all the prayers I know are rather somber in tone and make at least some passing reference to God.”

“Then let’s get some new ones. The men are already doing enough bitching about the missions I send them on without our rubbing it in with any sermons about God or death or Paradise. Why can’t we take a more positive approach? Why can’t we all pray for something good, like a tighter bomb pattern, for example? Couldn’t we pray for a tighter bomb pattern?”

“Well, yes, sir, I suppose so,” the chaplain answered hesitantly. “You wouldn’t even need me if that’s all you wanted to do. You could do that yourself.”

“I know I could,” the colonel responded tartly. “But what do you think you’re here for? I could shop for my own food, too, but that’s Milo’s job, and that’s why he’s doing it for every group in the area. Your job is to lead us in prayer, and from now on you’re going to lead us in a prayer for a tighter bomb pattern before every mission. Is that clear? I think a tighter bomb pattern is something really worth praying for. It will be a feather in all our caps with General Peckem. General Peckem feels it makes a much nicer aerial photograph when the bombs explode close together.”

San Francisco Corruption Revealed on the Floor of the House – Central Subway to Nowhere – A Short Speech

Friday, July 6th, 2012

The Subway to Nowhere. House Chamber, Washington, D.C. June 27, 2012. Remarks by Congressman Tom McClintock (R-CA).”

“Mr. Chairman:

This amendment forbids further federal expenditures for the Central Subway project in San Francisco.

The project is a 1.7 mile subway that is estimated to cost $1.6 billion –– and those cost estimates continue to rise.  Its baseline budget has more than doubled in nine years and shows no signs of slowing.  The current estimate brings the cost to nearly $1 billion per mile.  That’s five times the cost per lane mile of Boston’s scandalous “Big Dig.”

It was supposed to link local light rail and bus lines with CalTrain and Bay Area Rapid Transit, but it’s so badly designed that it bypasses 25 of the 30 light rail and bus lines that it crosses.  To add insult to insanity, it dismantles the seamless light-rail to BART connection currently available to passengers at Market Street, requiring them instead to walk nearly a quarter mile to make the new connection.  Experts estimate it will cost commuters between five and ten minutes of additional commuting time on every segment of the route.

The Wall Street Journal calls ita case study in government incompetence and wasted taxpayer money.”

They’re not alone.  The Civil Grand Jury in San Francisco has vigorously recommended the project be scrapped, warning that maintenance alone could ultimately bankrupt San Francisco’s Muni.  The former Chairman of the San Francisco Transportation Agency has called it, “one of the costliest mistakes in the city’s history.

Even the sponsors estimate that it will increase ridership by less than one percent, and there is vigorous debate that this projection is far too optimistic.

I think Margaret Okuzumi, the Executive Director of the Bay Rail Alliance put it best when she said,

Too many times, we’ve seen money for public transit used to primarily benefit people who would profit financially, while making transit less convenient for actual transit riders.  Voters approve money for public transit because they want transit to be more convenient and available…it would be tragic if billions of dollars were spent on something that made Muni more time consuming, costly and unable to sustain its overall transit service.”

This administration is attempting to put federal taxpayers – our constituents — on the hook for nearly a billion dollars of the cost of this folly through the “New Starts” program – or more than 60 percent.  We have already squandered $123 million on it.  This amendment forbids another dime of our constituents’ money being wasted on this boondoggle.

Now here is an important question that members may wish to ponder:  “Why should your constituents pay nearly a billion dollars for a purely local transportation project in San Francisco that is opposed by a broad, bi-partisan coalition of San Franciscans, including the Sierra Club, Save Muni (a grassroots organization of Muni Riders), the Coalition of San Francisco Neighborhoods, and three of the four local newspapers serving San Francisco?

Why, indeed.

I’m sorry, I don’t have a good answer to that question.  But those who vote against this amendment had better have one when their constituents ask, “What in the world were you thinking?”

# # #

This amendment to the Transportation, Housing and Urban Development Appropriations Act (HR 5972) was approved by the House on June 29th.  The legislation next goes to the Senate.

San Francisco’s 11th Commandment: Christians Shalt Not Obey Parking Rules on Sundays

Monday, June 25th, 2012

Thusly: 

Click to expand

You know, back in the day, SFGov freely violated the 14th Amendment until it got slapped down.

These days, SFGov violates the 1st Amendment with its Christians Park Free rule. When will SFGov get slapped down on this issue?

I know not. It’ll take a new Yick Wo to file a lawsuit. (Right? ‘Cause just nagging the SFGov isn’t going to cut it. SFGov will just ignore you.)

In the meantime, enjoy San Francisco’s Transit First (Except for Church-Goers) policy.

After an Unlawful BART Police Shooting, Protesters are Required to Wait Seven Days in Order to be Legal

Thursday, August 25th, 2011

Now, ideally, people protesting the next unlawful BART Police shooting would get seven-day notice so they could apply to legally protest the shooting on BART property.

But life doesn’t work that way IRL. So when a BART Police officer shoots somebody unlawfully or by mistake or whatever and people want to have a demo at BART that same day, well, that’s going to be an automatic violation of BART rules even if the protest takes place in the designated free speech area.

Check it:

BART requires those who wish to exercise their right to free speech to have a permit while on BART property. If you wish to obtain a permit, please do the following:

Download the Permit Rules and read them thoroughly. [And the permit application goes directly to BART's P.R. Dept., srsly.]
Download the Permit Application complete it and return it to BART.

BART must receive the permit no less than seven days prior to the date of your activity. Permits received after the seven day deadline will be denied – there are NO exceptions.

See how that works? Irate protesters have the choice of cooling their heels seven day to protest in a legal fashion in a legal area or protest the same day as the shooting illegally.

Maybe that’s part of the reason why you have so many “illegal” protests, BART?

And oh, has any legal protest at BART ever gotten any attention? Not to my knowledge.

And oh, has any Designated Free Speech Area looked good anytime, anywhere in history? Usually, these places are far from the action, sometimes encircled with cyclone fencing all around, you know, like Thunderdome.

Here’s the only Designated Free Speech Area that I’ve seen lately. It’s from somewhere in the vicinity of Strybing Arboretum, that place that got renamed and paywalled (that’s why there’s a boycott going on…) Anyway:

Click to expand

That’s what the people who run things in the Bay Area think protests should look like.

(Now, this designated area might have been a joke, but my point is that you can’t tell the difference – the real thing looks pretty unreal as well.)

To repeat, maybe this is part of the reason why you have so many “illegal” protests, BART?

Just asking, BART-bro.

All the deets after the jump.

(more…)

Small Section of Golden Gate Park Reserved Solely for Cross-Bearing, Proselytizing, Apostolic Franciscan Friar

Friday, September 24th, 2010

So there I was in Golden Gate Park tracking a giant blue bird and then when I looked up, I saw a hippy on a Jesus trip coming straight towards me larger than life.

Like this. See the robe, the beads, the sandals, the cross with the letters JHS* or IHS? This statue is a like a giant Catholic billboard on public land.

Check it, a huge bronze by Douglas Tilden made in 1906 and dedicated in 1907:

Via mharrsch - click to expand

So, here’s the Baby Name Wizard’s take on Junipero:

“Father Junipero Serra: Spanish Franciscan Friar. He is very well-known as a misogynistic abuser of native slaves and women, but remains an important historical figure in Central California.”

O.K. then. (Wow, a little harsh, huh?)

But what do you think Father Junípero Serra is trying to communicate here?

And what do you think the City and County of San Francisco is trying to promote by allowing public land for this kind of use?

Now, for some Christians, this statue, and the Prayerbook Cross just down the way, are not enough. These people go into the Music Concourse, see Father Serra and then get bummed:

I was just there today, and as a Christian, I was very dismayed by the fact that it seems the park administration has allowed the landscaping to STRATEGICALLY block out the base of the sculpture that has the inscribed descriptions of Junipero Serra. It’s religiously discriminatory and outright insulting, and apparently it’s condoned by the city. But then Jesus said his followers would be hated. At least we were warned.”

I’ll agree that the shrubbery appears to have been placed around this statue to obsure it somewhat. This kind of cover could be, as they say, constitutionally significant – it could affect a judge’s or a jury’s opinion on whether it’s kosher for San Francisco to reserve its land for this kind of message.

Father J was much more prominent back in the day. See?

I’ll tell you, our neighbors to the south in Los Angeles had similar issue with a cross that was a part of its history – here’s the story of how they handled it

How will San Francisco handle the case the Father Serra proselytizing in the GGP? 

Now, shouldn’t Golden Gate Park be a proselytizing-free zone reserved as a place for giant blue birds to eat rodents…

…and recycle aluminum cans?

You Make The Call.

*Now, about that inscription on the crossbar. It’s just a Christogram that spells out the first three letters of the name Jesus. So, it goes J-E-S, or Iota-Eta-Sigma. There’s no need to make up a backronym like Iesus Hominum Salvator or nothing.

Pirate Cat Grafitto Defies DPW’s “Anti-Truck Blight” Initiative

Wednesday, September 22nd, 2010

Do you think the grafitti on this truck makes the Panhandle area “look abandoned?”

If so, you’re not alone.

Click to expand:

Pirate Cat/ Pirate Cat/ It’s Not Your Fault

Could This Graffitoed Truck Get a Ticket for Causing Blight? Yes, if DPW Gets Its Way

Monday, September 20th, 2010

The DPW wants truck owners to get cited if they allow their rides to get covered in graffiti.

Of course, the City doesn’t have this issue with its own trucks as they get locked up at night.

Monica’s Florist blighting up the Financial:

Click to expand

I don’t know how this would fly in the courts…

Where Would Jesus Park (WWJP) – Would He Block Your Driveway Every Sunday?

Monday, March 29th, 2010

Oh the Yelpers were in a lather this AM over San Francisco’s questionable Sunday church parking policies. Comes now Alexandra to lament:

“What’s the deal with this? Why is it totally okay for church-goers to double park in front of people’s garages and driveways? My friend at work was just telling me how she was stuck at home all day Sunday because of the double-parked cars– she couldn’t leave the garage. Separation of church and state, anyone?”

Indeed. There are different issues here. Sometimes entire streets get blocked, sometimes parallel-parked cars get blocked, and sometimes driveways get blocked.

I’m not sure if San Francisco’s policies are written down anywhere, but what you’re supposed to do is to tiptoe up to the nearest church and whisper about your situation. Then bingo-bango, your car will be freed by a volunteer valet.

The start of another Sunday in “Transit First” San Francisco:

Now of course, we know that the SFPD and SFMTA will tolerate double parking anywhere near a church on Sunday, but what about other similar civic gatherings? If you push the Powers That Be, they’ll say that a church service is just another civic gathering entitled to some longstanding tradition of No Rules Sundays. All right. I don’t really buy that, but all right.

The City used to own a giant Latin cross atop Mount Davidson – alls it took was one lawsuit to fix that.

The City used to discriminate with a law that was neutral on its face - alls it took was one lawsuit to fix that.

Just saying…

San Francisco Rallies Against the Stupak Pitts Amendment to the Health Care Reform Bill

Thursday, December 3rd, 2009

A crowd of a hundred-something showed up on the steps of City Hall yesterday to protest against the Stupak Pitts proposal (aka the Stupak–Ellsworth–Pitts–Kaptur–Dahlkemper–Lipinski–Smith Amendment, srsly) regarding health plans covering abortions.

Moms and daughters were there…

IMG_0747

…plus San Francisco City Attorney Dennis Herrera and Supervisor Bevan Dufty

IMG_0754

And here’s a shot from the ACLU of Northern California of  UCSF med students for choice:

4154322236_3342ccb6f8_b

Are we heading for a filibuster?

All the deets here.