Social leftist 'tolerance' goes on view again
Why was Michelle Quinn's column criticizing Brendan Eich on page one and not relegated to the opinion page? Quinn showed her bias by calling Proposition 8 the "anti-gay marriage initiative" versus the "pro-traditional marriage" ballot measure.
Eich was forced to quit from Mozilla. Why? Not because he wasn't an effective CEO but because he donated $1,000 to support Prop. 8 eight years ago! Bigots rode him out of town on a rail.
In 2008, Barack Obama and Joe Biden were on record against "gay marriage." But Eich's donation was an unforgivable sin for the online hate mob that demanded the tech company push out Eich as CEO. Make no mistake: anti-marriage activists want to change public opinion so that anyone that disagrees with them are shamed as bigots -- for believing in the simple truth that children deserve a mom and dad. All kinds of research support that premise.
Spend those rail funds on desalinizing
Why do I continually read about the $68 billion bullet train project (which we don't need) and nothing about the 17 desalinization plants (that we do need) that are planned along our coastline?
Other than the Carlsbad facility that will be online in 2016 and the plant scheduled for Huntington Beach, we never hear a word about the other 15! Why are their locations, costs, capacity and online dates not shared with us who would like to know how our water needs are going to be met in the upcoming years!?
California has had its driest year on record, and more than 90 percent of California is affected by the drought. Our governor has stated, "We have to live with a very serious drought of uncertain duration."
We have got cars, trains and planes as a backup to a bullet train that can take us to Southern California, but what backup do we have for our dwindling water supply? Let's spend our tax dollars on something we cannot do without ... we could build and run a lot of desalinization plants for $68 billion dollars!
News more important than sports
In the April 1 publication of the San Ramon Valley Times, the prominent front page article entitled "Monty: It's time" chronicled the announced retirement of longtime Stanford and Cal men's basketball coach Mike Montgomery.
While this is certainly newsworthy it needs to be viewed within the context of other stories that ran that day in the main section of the paper. Back on page A6 of the first section ran an article of a just released study from the IPCC (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change) entitled, "Panel: Warming planet faces hunger 'hot spots.' "
The premise of this article focused on the IPCC's extensive study and findings surrounding future food production affecting 7 billion people. While the study looks out toward 2050 and says food prices are expected to go up somewhere in a wide range of 3 to 84 percent the underlying message is that climate change is going to have a significant and dramatic effect on world food production in the coming years. This seems to be a more important piece of news than the retirement of a college basketball coach (albeit a good one).
So much for Obama's GM success story
Vice President Biden should change his comment about Obama administration accomplishments to "Osama is dead and GM is under recall investigation."
Hurt vet was rioting, not 'protesting'
This is in regards to your article titled "War vet injured at protest wins $4.5M settlement." I am pretty close to canceling my subscription to your and any other Bay Area newspaper.
How does this "protester," who was lawfully asked and then told to desist his criminal actions, have the guts to use his time in the military as a crutch to exploit his actions and somehow justify his actions that in all probability increased his -- what I consider -- totally-uncalled-for reward?
He was with a large group of Occupy Oakland protesters, breaking windows, blocking streets so people could not drive to or from work and attacking the police and parked vehicles. These protesters were warned many, many times to stop and leave the area. The bean bag that your reporter called a "lead filled bag" is a nonlethal 4-inch cloth bag filled with BBs, not lead. It would appear that he was not a combat veteran; no soldier who has been in combat would march at a line of trained riot police.
Now to your comments about not allowing police to use nonlethal tools to aid them in their job. What is wrong with you? Your paper seems to condone riots and make heroes of these fools who get injured because they are stupid. What ever happened to consequences for your actions? Protesting is an American's right -- and I totally believe it should be -- but rioting in the streets and calling it a protest is wrong, and everybody knows it.
Now may I suggest a solution? How about letting the rioters wear themselves out turning over cars, smashing windows and stealing electronics, tennis shoes, heck, whatever they want? The loss would probably be below $4.5 million, the rioters will have new TVs and furnishings, the only injuries will be from brother rioters taking the stolen items from other rioters, and they can sue each other.
Now I know that will never happen because that would not be newsworthy. How about you assign a reporter to find out how these mobs magically appear with commercially made protest signs on work days and assigned positions for the riot leader? That is all. I am frustrated and getting really upset by what the media stirs up. Try just reporting the facts.
U.S. elections now openly for sale to bidders
The Supreme Court, in all its infinite wisdom, has ushered in a new era of plutocratic control over America's democratic process. Campaign finance laws enforcing the $123,000 contribution limit to federal candidates, parties and political action committees (PACs) were struck down, permitting any wealthy donor the ability to contribute more than $3,500,000 to a single party's candidates and party committee. McCutcheon v. FEC is another ruling in a series of decisions detrimental to what was once championed by American democracy -- equal opportunity for all to have a say in electoral process. This decision, compounded with the 2010 Citizens United ruling (which allows for unlimited financial support to PACs), has abolished decades-old protection against corruption or the appearance thereof. This decision will further encourage our elected representatives to push policies championed by their big donors rather than the people they represent.