Posts Tagged ‘newspaper’

The Last America’s Cup Column Ever from CW Nevius: Larry Ellison’s Former #1 Booster Becomes a Critic

Thursday, December 18th, 2014

I don’t see how CW Nevius could possibly write another America’s Cup column after this one, so enjoy:

Remember the America’s Cup?”

Sure, it was the event you cheerleaded for when you moved to town about four years ago. It cost us a lot of money and you, CW Nevius, never apologized.

Monumental hype, epic races and crashes on San Francisco Bay, and controversy on top of controversy.

Well, let’s see here, wasn’t it you, CW Nevius, who was Grand Marshall of the America’s Cup “hype” team? Yes, it was. And speaking of remembering, what about this quote: “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.” Again, it was you, CW Nevius. Except this fiasco wasn’t a wonderful opportunity, and it wasn’t a win-win, and actually, we lost money on the deal. And actually, somebody was killed in one of those “epic” crashes on San Francisco Bay, you remember? It was just last year, actually, that this occurred.

In San Francisco, he changed the boats from stodgy, slow monohulls to 72-foot catamarans that could jet over the waves at nearly 60 mph.

The prior Cup didn’t use stodgy, slow monohulls, as you seem to imply. The change away from monohulls didn’t happen in SF. You want to make some point, so you change the facts to fit?

Ellison apparently wanted to be praised and admired. We were more like, “Uh, Larry, you promised us a fleet of eight to 12 boats and you only delivered three. And by the way, the 72-footers are so big and unwieldy that they are scary and dangerous.”

The problem with this is that CW Nevius was a great proponent of “NASCAR on the water. But then when he actually gets NASCAR on the water, he claims he doesn’t like it. OK fine.

Ellison is on the case this time. The boats will be smaller, 60 feet, will “only” reach speeds of 50 mph, and there will be a lot more of them. Five challengers have already committed, with five more “expressing interest.”

Oh, so CW Nevius now “knows” that everything will be fine with the boats next time, the same way he thought everything was going to be fine with the boats last time. Also, he now “knows” there’ll be more competitors?

San Francisco spent, and after sponsorships were included the city’s contribution was just $24 million. (The final event shortfall was $5 million after sales and endorsement money came in.)

“Just” $24 million, huh? Well, that number is understated, and I wouldn’t put a “just” in front of it. And the loss for SFGov  was far greater than $5 million.

So maybe we misunderstood Ellison. Maybe instead of bringing sailing to the masses, what he really meant was he was bringing masses of money to sailing. But the press coverage in Bermuda is expected to be very flattering.

So why does CW Nevius expect press coverage in Bermuda to be “very flattering?” What’s the connection between the stinger and all that came before it?

(CW Nevius sometimes seems to think that he himself is the San Francisco Chronicle, but I strongly disagree with that concept. Hey, what if the Chron were a catamaran, then what The Nevius be? A bunch of barnacles on the hulls? Something like that.)

Writer C.W. Nevius Makes Amends for “This Isn’t Oakland” with His Gay Games Bit? – SFAA v. USOC IRL

Friday, December 12th, 2014

Poor CW Nevius is still smarting over the drubbing he took over “This isn’t Oakland.” Check it:

 Dec 9  Hey Jessica. If you are going to write something like that, you might want to check in with me. I’m pretty reasonable.
Here’s what he’s so mad about:

SF CHRONICLE COLUMNIST BASHES OAKLAND

See how that works? You all need to check in with CW himself before you criticize him – that’s the rule. It’s a kind of YOU DON’T KNOW ME! defense, one supposes.

So that’s the context.

Now look! San Francisco Chronicle’s right-of-center Everyman has lurched across the aisle with this recent effort about the local history of the Gay Olympics / Gay Games:

S.F. backstory to Olympics’ new policy on gays, by C.W. Nevius

Now here’s your real back story. First, bone up on this:

Amateur Sports Act of 1978

And then see the court case that explains why the term Gay Games is kosher but Gay Olympics isn’t. A 7-2 decision, more or less:

San Francisco Arts & Athletics, Inc. v. United States Olympic Committee

Here’s my point – what Nevius is saying is that the USOC’s effort to defend its “brand” back in the 1970′s was “pointless.” Except the USOC won and now the Gay Olympics is known as the Gay Games and life goes on.

Do you want to get into why the IOC / USOC and all the other OC’s of the world tolerate people using a term like “Redneck Olympics,” at least until it grows into a big event? Be my guest.

(Oh, but wait, the official name of that event in Georgia is now the Redneck Games. Is the USOC against rednecks? IDK.)

Speaking of points, here’s one:

Mess with the Olympic brand long enough and you just might end up with a lien on your house.

Which is fair enough, I suppose.

(And actually, the USOC lifted the lien anyway.)

Hey remember what CW Nevius had to say before the disastrous 34th America’s Cup came to town? He called it:

a wonderful opportunity without a downside.”

Except we ended up with a lot of downsides.

And now he’s cheerleading for the 2024 Olympics to come to town. And while he’s doing that, he criticizes the USOC for stuff from a third of a decade ago.

Of course, he could criticize the current USOC, but no, Nevius doesn’t want to do that.

Hey look, it’s gay rights champion Vladimir Putin chilling with CW Nevius hero Larry “The Good” Probst:

chi-20141209-001 copy

 

And when was this shot taken, was it a third of a century ago?

Oh no, it was this year.

Oh well.

Compare and Contrast: Marin County’s Bicycle Movement vs. San Francisco’s – Point / Counterpoint with Marinite Dick Spostwood

Thursday, December 11th, 2014

Check it out:

Dick Spotswood: Marin bike lobby’s political clout is slipping – Marin Independent Journal

1. Hey, SF County has a “powerful bicycle lobby” as well – so let’s take a look, paragraph by paragraph. I should say though, that if I were running things bike-wise in Marin, I prolly wouldn’t listen to Dick Spotswood at all.

2. I’ll bet you the Marin County real estate industry, for instance, has lobbyists more effective than the Marin County Bicycle Coalition’s, to keep things in perspective.

3. So DS is promoting a “silent majority” argument against a minority of a minority? OK fine, but it sounds like he’s mad at just a small number of bikers. And what’s this – “self-righteous on-the-road arrogance?” We have a bit of that on our side of The Bridge also.

4, 5, 6, 7, 8. Well, I didn’t know all that stuff. San Francisco County Supervisors don’t really have to worry about people coming after them for excessive bike advocacy, so this makes Marin seem a lot different than SF. I’ll tell you, riding through a smelly old train tunnel sounds like something worth trying, once or twice anyway. (I could go either way on whether opening these tunnels makes sense, cost benefit-wise – I don’t know much about them.)

9, 10. Charging people for walking or riding across the GGB is a real non-starter, like something that’s never going to happen ever again. (Actually, I wouldn’t mind if the state of CA rolled governance of the GGB into the BATA and then cast Golden Gate Transit out, leaving Marin County to pay for Marin County’s transit system. JMO.)

11. “Biker-anarchist Critical Mass” isn’t all that much these days and it doesn’t operate “most Fridays,” just some Fridays, just once a month, actually.

12. My understanding is that “bicycles are generally restricted from narrow, single-track trails” on Mt Tam, but perhaps some trails have been opened up recently? IDK.

13. What’s this, the  Marin bike movement was “hijacked by big-time developers and their regional alphabet agencies’ allies.” Wow, yes, the same thing happened in SF over the past quarter-century – this is the era of the “urbanst,” indeed.

14. We have a similar dynamic in SF, but it’d be hard to imagine bike advocacy ever being a “ballot box negative” down here.

15. Oh, at long last, the TO BE SURE graf! Finally, all the way at the bottom. Hurrah!

16, 17. Oh, and now come the bromides for the bike movement of Marin. IDK, if I had a lot of time and not much money, I’d get my buds to pack into political meetings as well.

All right, that’s it.

(Oh, I’ll add that the membership at the San Francisco Bicycle Coalition appears to have dropped something close to 20% from the high of a few years back. The SFBC has been captured by SFGov, so  these days it pays more heed to whichever Mayor is in currently in office than its remaining membership. JMO.)

CW Nevius Roundup: An Apology to Oakland! – Plus Nevius the Union Activist – Plus Errors re: Golden Gate Park

Friday, December 5th, 2014

1. The Apology. Normally I’d just do a retweet but I’ve been blocked from doing just that, so here’s a back-and-forth on the recent “This isn’t Oakland” bit:

Capturehdh copy

Now actually, in defense of The Nevius, I think he was merely channeling what the SFPD brass had to say, as Nevius is wont to do, about comparing the SFPD response to a protest situation vs. how the OPD handled things in the recent past. So the stood aside and let the looting and window shattering play out” comment just might have been a reference to comments made a few years back by the Oakland Mayor or by the OPD. So the “this isn’t Oakland” stinger could have been referring to that.

In any event, even the Nevius Wife didn’t like the Oakland Comment, so Nevius apologized on Twitter (and maybe ten people read it). It’s a real apology, but it was made to just a handful of people. 

2. Nevius the Union Activist. Check out this recent bit about San Francisco taxi drivers and then ponder this:

In his own personal life, CW Nevius is a union activist. Like, he goes to meetings ‘n stuff

That means he’s not just a union member, oh no. I’ve been a union member, but I wasn’t no shop steward, I wasn’t no agitator the way CW Nevius is in some kind of media guild thing.

So, isn’t it ironic, dontcha think, that union activist CW Nevius takes such an anti Labor tone?

3. Nevius the right of center megaphone for the San Francisco’s dominant right of center political faction. I’m specifically referring to this bit about Stow Lake Boat House.

He goes on and on about how great the Stow Lake Boat House is now:

And now it looks terrific, and I haven’t heard a word of complaint.

IRL, not a whole bunch has changed there. Tourists come, pay their money, get a boat for an hour, and then do a lap around Strawberry Hill on Stow Artificial Pond.

(Of course, CW Nevius is a newcomer to San Francisco, so he missed out on most of the action at Stow Lake.)

In any event, yes, the opposition to the new vendor was absurd, but that doesn’t prove his point that all opposition to the corrupt right of center political Establishment is absurd. Let’s take a look:

At yet, at the end of the day, not only do we end up doing the right thing, everyone seems to move on and forget and forgive.

So what, did “we” do “the right thing” voting down 8 Washington – did we “forget and forgive” “at the end of the day?” Mmm… Moving on.

Now here’s a load of BS:

To Park Commission President Mark Buell, that’s not just a theory. He’s lived it. “When I became president, I was given some advice,” he said. “I was told there were four things I would never get accomplished: getting a new vendor at Stow Lake, closing the recycling center at Golden Gate Park, charging a visitors fee at the arboretum, and putting artificial turf at the Beach Chalet soccer fields.”

All right, note the passive voice here in the quote from an area right of center apparatchik. Who said these words? Oh, you don’t want to say? Oh, your quote only discusses your victories and leaves out your losses? So, how did the unnamed person making this quote know back then what you would “get accomplished?” I don’t know, you could put Mark Buell through a polygraph session to prove that he believes all this stuff, but it doesn’t mean his memory is correct.

And actually, it was a piece of cake to get a new vendor at Stow Lake. Somebody paid a lobbyist $10k a month for months and months to lobby the Board of Supervisors. That’s the source of this “accomplishment.”

And is closing a recycling center at the request of millionaire NIMBY homeowners an “accomplishment?” IDK.

And is clearing out out-of-towners at Strybing Arboretum an “accomplishment? Not really. RPD wanted to pay more than a million dollars to build two kiosks to pay workers minimum wage to collect seven dollars a head? Yes. And how have things worked out? Well, the number of visitors has fallen dramatically. Is that a good thing? Well, in the eyes of millionaires who like plants more than people, the answer is yes.

I disagree.

IMO, is it short-sighted to fuck over Helene Strybing by renaming the joint and throwing up a paywall in a fruitless pursuit to make the place “world-class,” to impress all the arboretum societies Back East? Yes.

And while I don’t personally object to the new soccer fields at the Beach Chalet, that doesn’t mean that all is well with the political faction that runs Rec and Park. Hey, how about putting parking meters in all over GGP? Wasn’t that an “accomplishment” that the right of center faction wanted? Hell yes. But we don’t have no meters, huh? And the whole issue is forgotten now? How convenient!

Moving on, to San Mateo County:

He might have added saving the Sharp Park Golf Course in Pacifica.

I know why SF runs a jail complex and an international airport in San Mateo County, but I don’t know why on Earth it runs a golf course. Perhaps SF should get rid of it? Is that on the table? No? All right.

His point, of course, was that while each of those initiatives proved to be controversial and difficult, they’ve all been accomplished…

My point is, of course, is that this a highly biased view of the recent history of the RPD.

Moving on to another falsehood:

“Think about the (AT&T) ballpark,” Buell said. “How many people fought the idea of a downtown ballpark? And once it is built, everybody takes credit for it.”

This sounds like the way people talk when they’re drunk, boasting at a bar. It’s not based on reality.

And here’s the stinger, from the newcomer who just moved here, who wanted to move here:

Don’t look for logic. It’s just how we do things.

Is simple-minded CW Nevius, the Fallacy Spewing Machine, on the side of “logic,” really?

OK fine.

FIN

The Never-Ending Vigil: Falun Gong vs. the Chinese Consulate on Geary – Continuing Rain or Shine

Friday, December 5th, 2014

Here’s how things look on Geary during our recent rains…

7J7C0094 copy

…and here’s a 14 year old San Jose Mercury News report on the same group at the same location:

They’ve become part of the landscape on Geary and Laguna. Every morning they wave and say, “Good morning,” to the San Francisco police officer on duty, Xu said. Every evening, they say, “Good night.” They are so familiar with the postal carrier they know when a substitute is walking the route and greet both warmly.

Across the street, a San Francisco police officer sits in his vehicle, reading a paper. The cops hardly think a dozen old people and mothers with kids in tow are a threat to the People’s Republic of China, but as a matter of policy, the police dispatch an officer whenever there is a demonstration in front of the consulate.

The officer on the scene may change, but one keeps in contact with the protesters and the consulate: officer Jeff Roth, the event coordinator at Northern Station, which handles more than a few consulates because the district straddles the Western Addition, Pacific Heights and the Marina.

“They aren’t happy about it, but they don’t really have a say in the matter,” Roth said of the consulate officials.

Other protests — over Tibet and the like — have brought requests from the consulate in the past for police to stop protesters, Roth said. “We’ve explained, ‘Yes, the consulate is Chinese property, but this is America — the protesters have their First Amendment rights.’”

I’ll tell you, it’s not my habit to repost SJMN articles, but this one appears to have gone missing. If somebody can find an official link, please send it my way, by all means. (I hope it’s archived somewhere – it’s a bit surprising to me how it’s been lost in the sands of time after just 14 years.

In the meantime, this is my best guess as to how this article appeared back at the turn of the century:

(more…)

Is It Really a “Stereotype” That Homeless People in San Francisco “Come Here From Somewhere Else?”

Monday, December 1st, 2014

Here you go:

Ad blitz in transit hubs designed to break homeless stereotypes by Heather Knight

Starting Monday, there will be even more. A new ad campaign produced by the Coalition on Homelessness will go up in public transportation hubs and on Muni buses with the intention of breaking stereotypes about homeless people. You know, that they’re freeloaders who come here from somewhere else…

So, aren’t most homeless people in San Francisco (and, of course, most non-homeless people as well) “from somewhere else?”

The answer to that question is yes, yes they are.

So, does lying about facts help to “break” “stereotypes,” Coalition on Homelessness?

I think not.

And that means that asking convoluted poll questions designed to get a desired  answer, well I don’t see how that helps.

Sorry.

But what this kind of thing does do is reinforce stereotypes about certain non-profits in San Francisco…

The Harvard Crimson Comes Out Against Hosting 2024 Olympics – Why Can’t the Stanford Daily Do the Same Thing?

Monday, November 24th, 2014

Well, here it is, the Harvard Crimson coming out against the idea of Boston hosting the 2024 Olympics.

So why can’t the Stanford Daily come out against the idea of San Francisco hosting the very same Olympics?

I’ll tell you, the United States Olympic Committee is going to be all over the Bay Area over the next 24 hours and then they’re going to pick one of four possible US hosts in a month or so.

So that’s it, the Final Four will be winnowed down and then the next step will be the USOC saying they want the Olympics in America (there’s a 99% chance of that happening) and then the next step would be the corrupt IOC deciding to award the ‘Lympics to ‘Merica.

So this isn’t the “first inning” of this process – it’s more like the seventh. The time to avoid the bay area losing 11 figures on this kind of fiasco is right now right now wikiwiki, Brah.

And here’s John Oliver to bring it all home for us, in a four-minute video.

Whoa: Asiana Airlines Flights To and From SFO “Likely” to be Suspended for as much as Four Months – Punishment for Flight 214

Thursday, November 13th, 2014

From San Francisco-based military writer Kyle Mizokami comes word of a plan to temporarily suspend Asiana Airlines flights between Incheon International Airport (ICN) and SFO:

Asiana Faces Suspension of San Francisco Flights

“Under the plan, the ministry will ask Korean Air to use larger aircraft on the Incheon-San Francisco route to increase the number of seats, bring in chartered planes, or channel passengers on transit routes. A senior ministry official recently visited concerned lawmakers at the National Assembly to brief them on the plan.”

Does this seem real to you? It seems real to me. Or perhaps elements of the Republic of Korea are trying to scare Asiana straight after the Flight 214 disaster?

Korean Air currently uses Boeing 747 and 777 aircraft on this route – might it be tough for it to expand capacity just for a few months? IDK. I can’t think of too many options for KA to use planes larger than these, excepting for one or two of their ten newish double-decker superjumbo Airbus A380′s, but it’s not like those aircraft are just sitting around waiting to be used this way.

This suspension idea doesn’t make sense to me – I suppose we’ll find out tonight…

[UPDATE: Well, a 45 suspension just got handed down, but Asiana wants to appeal the decision.]

How the San Francisco Giants are LYING When They Say “Ticket Scalping is Illegal” in San Francisco

Friday, October 24th, 2014

C’mon focus, look at the sign, as seen this morning by Stanley Roberts of People Behaving Badly and KRON-TV

1510881_840024242685136_4601403535699459182_n copy

Now it could be that this is what the San Francisco Giants organization wishes Police Code Section 869 would say, but this aint what it says.

Comes now SF Weekly writer Joe Eskenazi:

“…according to the police code cited on the sign (Good Ol’ No. 869) scalping is not strictly illegal: This is a code that prohibits folks from selling wares on the street without a peddlers’ permit. This means folks who sell their tickets online or out of their homes or offices are not violating the law. And your humble narrator was unable to find anything within the police code stating that people who buy wares from unlicensed peddlers are subject to arrest…”

So, Giants, why don’t you take these signs down, or change them? 

(more…)

Coyote Warnings are Out Again in Golden Gate Park – At the Conservatory and Academy – But Don’t Say, “Clever Girl!”

Thursday, October 16th, 2014

I’m not sure when CW Nevius SF Coyote Hysteria hit its peak – I think it was a year or two after he moved to town, so it must have been a year or two ago. Here’s a sample, where the SF newcomer uses the term “we” as if he were a long-timer:

Simple-Minded San Francisco Chronicle Writer CW Nevius Considers Urban Coyotes Dangerous and Pit Bulls Harmless

So how many people have been nipped at by San Francisco coyotes since the Era of Alarmism? How about zero? Compare that with the number of people hospitalized from dog attacks over the same period.  Mmmm…

Anyway, there are more signs than usual on the East Si-iiide of the park these days:

7J7C7507 copy

And here’s some mockery of these now-famous coyote signs, from back in the day

248714970-copy1