Click to expand
Posts Tagged ‘chinese’
Here’s the issue:
“DON’T YOU SIDEBALL ME: Chronicle’s Beth Spotswood blogged Feb. 17 about being given “extreme side eyes” near the Lunar New Year parade reviewing stand in Chinatown as she vainly scouted for verbal shots against local pols from Chinese Chamber of Commerce advisor Rose Pak. As Spotswood skulked about and expressed disappointment about Auntie Rose’s tameness, she nicknamed one parade observer as a scowling “Side Eyes” allegedly close to Pak…While fortunately not tagging anyone as an incendiary “slant eye” or “round eye,” she had to be referring to a fish …”
Verdict: NOT RACIST. (This was an easy one.)
And actually, Rose Pak got pressured by elements of the Communist Party of China (CPC) as well as SFGov, so she doesn’t mouth off as much anymore.
Even her 2012 performance was relatively tame:
She was out of control back in the aughts.
Evanescent Evidence: Rose Pak Spanked by the Fair Political Practices Commission Over Travel to China a Half-Decade AgoWednesday, March 5th, 2014
Gaia bless state and federal investigators in their efforts to clean up this town.
(If Rose Pak had a gift for me, I’d turn her down…)
Anyway, here’s the pdf from two point something years ago.
And here’s the OCR (but as you can see from the link, this evidence of wrongdoing is fading from the Web, at least in OCR form).
“Contents : FAIR POLITICAL PRACTICES COMMISSION 428 J Street Suite 620 Sacramento CA 958I4 2329 !916 322 5660 Fax t9!b) 322 0886 August 22 2011
Ms. Rose Pak o/b/o Chinese New Year Festival Committee REDACTED Letter Re: FPPC No. 11/081 Carmen Chu, David Chiu and Eric Mar
Dear Ms. Pak: The Fair Political Practices Commission (the “FPPC”) enforces the provisions of the Political Reform Act (the “Act”) found in Government Code section 81000 et seq. As you may be aware the Commission has undertaken an investigation into gifts of travel to southern China from November Ii. 2009 through November 16 2009 provided by the Chinese New Year Festival Committee to Supervisors Carmen Chu David Chiu and Eric Mar.
The Act places limitations on the acceptance of gifts by certain public officials including city supervisors. Section 89503(a) prohibits these public officials from accepting gifts from any single source in any calendar year with a total value of more than the applicable gift limit. The $250 gift limit is adjusted biennially to reflect changes in the Consumer Price Index pursuant to Section 89503 subdivision (t). The gift limit in 2009 was $420. (Regulation 18940.2.)
Under specific circumstances payments for transportation lodging and subsistence may be exempt from the definition of “gift.” Section 89506(a)(2) provides that travel expenses reasonably related to a legislative or governmental purpose or to an issue of state national or international policy are not prohibited or limited if they are provided by certain specified sources such as governmental agencies bona fide public or private educational institutions or non-profit 50 I (c)(3) organizations. During the course of our investigation we reviewed documents obtained from the Internal Revenue Service (the “IRS”) concerning the Chinese New YearFestival Committee’s tax exempt status.
According to these documents which included copies of IRS filings and The Political Reform Act is contained in Government Code sections 81000 through 91014. All statutory references are to the Government Code unless otherwise indicated. The regulations of the Fair Political Practices Commission are contained in sections 18110 through 18997 of Title 2 of the California Code of Regulations. All regulatory references are to Title 2 Division 6 of the California Code of Regulations unless otherwise indicated. FPPC Case No. 11/081 Page 2 01’2 Articles of incorporation originally filed with theCalifornia Secretary of State the Chinese New Year Festival Committee is registered as a 501 (c)(6) chamber of commerce organization. It has never been registered as a 50J(c)(3) organization. Therefore the requirements under Section 89506(a)(2) for an exception to the gift limit are not met and any gift including those of travel are subject to gift limits. Please be advised that since the Chinese New Year Festival Committee is not an organization that falls under Section 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code no public official may accept gifts of any type from this organization valued in excess of the applicable limit. Feel free to contact me with any questions you may have regarding this letter. Sincerely REDACTED ‘-iachary ‘ II. Norton Commission Counsel Enforcement Division”
OMG, It’s Republican Week at the Commonwealth Club: P.J. O’Rourke, Tom Perkins, and Amy Chua & Feb 12-14Monday, February 10th, 2014
Your Commonwealth Club has gone stark raving mad for the Grand Old Party this week!
Check it here are the top three joints that the CC is promoting right now:
And Tiger Mother Amy Chua* et vir,** well, they sure sound Republican.
But rest assured, the following week features Barbara Boxer and other Dems flogging their books and causes and whatnot, so everything’ll be back to normal soon ‘nough.
This concludes OMG, It’s Republican Week at the Commonwealth Club: P.J. O’Rourke, Tom Perkins, and Amy Chua & Jed Rubenfeld Feb 12-14.
*”Provocative and profound, Chua and Rubenfeld will transform the way we think about success and achievement.” Uh, nope!
**Namely, Tiger Mother Baby Daddy (TMBD) Jed Rubenfeld. Who’s he? Let’s check his Wiki – “Personal life: Rubenfeld is Jewish.” OK then.
Longtime East Bay Resident and SFGate Advocacy Journalist CW Nevius ID’s Cable Car as a “Hyde Street Trolly”Monday, January 6th, 2014
(You can take the boy out of the East Bay (and plop him in a SoMA condo), but you can’t take the East Bay out of the boy.)
Gentle Reader, consider CW Nevius and his most recent bit advocating for the oppressed white millionaire homeowners of Russian Hill – this time he’s acting at the behest of Supervisor Mark Farrell (R., District 2)
Click to expand
Now I think the word you’re looking for, CW Nevius, is trolley with an “e,” as in potatoe.
Except it aint a trolley, it’s a cable car. To wit:
“…electric tram (streetcar), sometimes confused with a cable car.”
And the vehicle code section cited here is wrong:
“The problem, says Deputy City Attorney Buck Delventhal, is California Vehicle Code 21106.1…”
CW Nevius, if you’re going to take the trouble to cite a law, why not take the time to do it the right way? Do you feel overworked, CW? You shouldn’t. Moving on…
And there’s this:
“Stefani says Farrell’s office was unaware of the 1987 law…”
Uh, former law? Or former bill? Did the “law” sunset automatically? And was it ever signed by The Duke in the first place? I don’t think so actually.
You see, CW Nevius, what you should look at are the reasons why the millionaires’ efforts always fail. Try this on for size:
“The streets of a city belong to the people of the state, and the use thereof is an inalienable right of every citizen, subject to legislative control or such reasonable regulations as to the traffic thereon or the manner of using them as the legislature may deem wise or proper to adopt and impose.’ … ‘Streets and highways are established and maintained primarily for purposes of travel and transportation by the public, and uses incidental thereto. Such travel may be for either business or pleasure…”
Nevius, why don’t you retire or go back to sports, srsly? Then you’d get replaced by somebody who would do your job better than you, right? Wouldn’t that be a win-win?
But before you do that, why don’t you fix this**`?
“Jose had been struck by a late-’90s, silver, four-door sedan as he stepped off the curb at Oak and Scott.”
“And the intersection of Fell and Scott, where Jose was hit, has consistently been described as one of the city’s most dangerous.”
*Looks like somebody is striking a pose on the crosswalk:
I’m a model you know what I mean
And I do my little turn on the
Yeah on the catwalk on the crosswalk, yeah
I do my little turn on the crosswalk
**I actually believed The Neve on the Fell and Scott thing, so I was going to go out there a week or two later on a Tuesday night at around the same time on the theory that this was somebody coming home during the evening drive. But then I saw that the actual location was on Oak so now I think the driver isn’t on a commuting schedule. You know, I’ve got a Canon 5D, crank the ISO up to 25,600, use a simple 200mm 2.8 prime to see if I could see some damage and get a plate. I mean it might have been worth the effort.