Skip to content

CityBeat Presents….Election Night Live Blog at SDVOTES.COM

June 7, 2010 - 10:08 am

San Diego CityBeat’s
Election Night Live Blog
Starts 6 p.m. Tuesday, June 8, 2010

At, San Diego CityBeat will be blogging live results from Golden Hall’s election central Tuesday night and gauging the impact with a panel of some of the wittiest political minds from the right, left and center.

We’ll have video and photos and tweets from the scenes and we’ll even twist a few politicians’ arms to make them come sit down and live blog with it us.* This is an experiment, but it will rock. Readers shouldn’t be surprised if it spirals into chaos—as any good election night does.

Here’s what says about

We may be Center-Right, the folks at CityBeat may like to call themselves Progressives.… Yet, we can all agree that it would be way cool to provide some real time, high-tech election analysis, discussion, and good-natured smack to our respective readers on Tuesday night. Which IS pretty progressive, if not in the philosophical sense.

“Plus, they asked us. Which we thought was pretty cool as well.

If you have no clue what we’re talking about, just show up at sometime after 6 pm. on June 8. You’ll figure it out quick enough. (Logging in to comment is easy: Just type your name or use the Twitter or Facebook login.)

Hosts: Justin McLachlan and Dave Maass

Featured guests include:
» Carl Luna, USD / San Diego Mesa College, Political Lunacy
» Chris Crotty, Crotty Consulting
» Doug Porter,
» Barry Jantz, Flash Report /
» Gayle “Libertarian Lass” Falkenthal, Falcon Valley Group
» Paul M. Bowers, School District Wonk

With appearances from CityBeat editor David Rolland, writer Liam Dillon and maybe even Undercover Gover, whoever the anonymous political blogger may be.

Plus readers, tweeters and any politician or player we can grab at Golden Hall.

For more information:
Dave Maass

* The extent/frequency of these multimedia elements hinges on the level of Internet access the city provides at Golden Hall.

77 Comments leave one →
  1. pistoleropete permalink
    June 7, 2010 - 12:57 pm 12:57 pm

    I’ll try to check this out Dave.

    • June 9, 2010 - 4:08 pm 4:08 pm

      Thanks for stopping by, Pete, and for keeping it cool.

      • pistoleropete permalink
        June 9, 2010 - 10:39 pm 10:39 pm

        No problem. I was a bit pissed a few of things I said or asked weren’t posted by hey….whatever. Life’s too short and I don’t hold it against you personally. I thought it was pretty cool and hope to be able to do it again in November.

        • June 10, 2010 - 7:21 am 7:21 am

          Hey, thanks! Folks were still figuring out how to use the software, but you know, when you have that many people asking questions it’s hard to get to them all. Maybe we can figure out a better system for November.

          • pistoleropete permalink
            June 10, 2010 - 11:22 am 11:22 am

            Yeah…I kind of figured it was because there were too many questions at once. As the session wore on, I lightened up. I guess I was just perplexed because I wasn’t trying to outright offend anyone. Oh well. Shit happens. I’m over it. 😀

          • June 10, 2010 - 11:31 am 11:31 am

            Yeah, you did well!

  2. denisfay permalink
    June 8, 2010 - 5:42 pm 5:42 pm

    so then, this means you’ll be ignoring the boycott?

  3. June 8, 2010 - 5:57 pm 5:57 pm

    Fuck the boycott.

  4. refriedgringo permalink
    June 9, 2010 - 3:45 pm 3:45 pm

    You guys were really slobbering all over yourselves when Horn appeared headed for a run-off. I only tuned in for a few minutes last night, but, yeah, real balanced. I was on the internet last night trying to find an array of election coverage, and all I really got from you guys was how proud you were that Horn was glaring at your table. You really need to curb your enthusiasm when it comes to going after one person or persons on that agenda of yours. Horn didn’t get under 50% because of SD CB articles, it’s because he’s an asshole. He’ll still win the 5th district, regardless, because North San Diego is apathetic.

  5. June 9, 2010 - 3:50 pm 3:50 pm

    So you’re going to judge based on a few minutes?

    For the record, our guests included Carl DeMaio and Lani Lutar of the San Diego County Taxpayer’s Association. We were promoted heavily on Amato’s talk radio by some of our main guests, Barry Jantz and Gayle Falkenthal, two of San Diego’s most prolific conservatives, who also gave us props on the blog Even the San Diego Republican Party Chairman Tony Krvaric tweeted that his followers should check us out.

    Plus, we ripped the shit out of the Dems and labor for their boycott of election central.

    Jeez…even Pistol Pete got time. If that ain’t balanced, I don’t know what is.

    • pistoleropete permalink
      June 9, 2010 - 10:42 pm 10:42 pm

      LULZ! I would’ve posed more questions and comments but I don’t really follow local politics all that much. I wanted to rip into Lori Saldana about the Open Carry Bill but figured it wouldn’t be in good spirit or good taste and that it wouldn’t get posted either.

      • June 10, 2010 - 7:24 am 7:24 am

        We get press releases about that bill every day and I’m a little surprised it’s even got this far. I don’t know that it would’ve been a matter of good spirit or taste, but rather just off topic since it’s election night, not legislature night. Maybe it’d make sense for us to do a few townhall sorts of things with the software.

        • pistoleropete permalink
          June 10, 2010 - 11:26 am 11:26 am

          I’m buying a camera on Saturday. Sometime next week I’m going to start making some political vids. I(or a viewer) tosses up a subject and I discuss my views on it. I’m trying to start a big political discussion before we start shooting our political adversaries. 😀 I won’t be outright flaming anyone or anything so it should be fun. I’ll send you the link when I create it.

  6. refriedgringo permalink
    June 9, 2010 - 6:36 pm 6:36 pm

    Hey, Dave, I didn’t tune in to see what I saw – I didn’t have anything in mind, simply following election coverage and gave it a shot. In the few minutes I watched the tweetfest, there were no less than five references to the Horn stuff. One by Kelly, one by someone else, and three by you, and you all seemed quite pleased with yourselves. As I left, you were off to get a picture of Horn before going elsewhere.

    • June 9, 2010 - 7:16 pm 7:16 pm

      You’re not only a hater, but you make shit up too.

      First of all, regarding Horn: I did no such thing.

      I was hardly online since I was managing everything behind the scenes. Horn arrived just as I was leaving Election Central for the Democrats’ party at the W, where I remained for pretty much the rest of the night. By the time I got back, Election Central was empty except for a few Gronke and Popaditch supporters. I did not and could not have posted three messages about Horn or even one message or left to snap a photo of him.

      You’re must be talking about Dave Rolland, who did try to take a photo of Horn.

      Oh, but wait. There are 24 references to Horn on the blog. Dave Rolland mentioned him but once:

      *drolland: Gronke has 21 percent. If he picks up all the other candidates’ vote in November, Horn could go down*

      Hardly slobbering. Rolland was just looking at the numbers. Here are Kelly’s for the whole night:

      Kelly Davis (SDCB): Horn still doesn’t have 50 percent.
      Kelly Davis (SDCB): Bill Horn’s in the house, we were just informed.
      Kelly Davis (SDCB): Hey Aaryn. Everyone, CityBeat columnist Aaryn Belfer. Horn’s in the lead, but doesn’t have a majority of the vote. Steve Gronke, whom we endorsed, is second.
      Kelly Davis (SDCB): The CityBeat table just got a dirty look from the Horn contingent.
      Kelly Davis (SDCB): @BlueSD: Dave Rolland just ran off to snap a photo of Bill Horn.
      Kelly Davis (SDCB): Just found out Bill Horn’s suite number at U.S. Grant….

      Again, where’s the slobber? The pride? The over-enthusiasm?

      The bulk of the rest are references from Justin, Gil Cabrera, Blue San Diego and Barry Jantz to where Horn was in the results, with nothing really negative about him. There are no references to our reporting.

      I defy you to show me that interaction. Or just cite the time stamps on the transcript:

      That race was legitimately significant, it was one people were watching, and just because you happened to turn up for the few minutes that race was being discussed is no indication of us slobbering over ourselves.

      To put it in perspective as far as our “balance” goes:

      DeMaio references: 40
      Roberts references: 31
      Howard references: 27
      Horn references: 24
      Prop D references: 20
      “Strong Mayor”: 24
      Zapf: 19
      Wayne: 13
      Alvarez: 11
      Whitman: 11
      Fiorina: 8
      Popaditch: 6

      So, step off, fool. You don’t know shit.

      • refriedgringo permalink
        June 10, 2010 - 1:07 pm 1:07 pm

        Wow, I’m flattered that you went to all of this effort, Dave. In the long run, I hope it does you some good. I have no intention of spending any time going back into the “log” and re-checking anything. I read what I read when I read it, and pointed it out, although it seems I quoted you too much and Kelly not enough. So yeah, I don’t know shit. But I certainly didn’t misrepresent what I stated.

        And Dave, I don’t hit this site every day. In the future, if I don’t respond right away, please refrain from emailing me taunts to do so. That’s almost as bad as the name calling.

        • June 10, 2010 - 1:12 pm 1:12 pm

          Oh, so you read what you read, but then it’s OK because you misremembered it? What are you, Hillary Clinton in Bosnia?

          Here’s a name for you: RefriedPunkass.

          • refriedgringo permalink
            June 10, 2010 - 2:36 pm 2:36 pm

            Yes, you’ve mentioned my new name in the latest emails you’ve sent me. I’ve been very respectful toward you and toward this site and the weekly, pointing out things that could help you become better. I’ve been repaid with name-calling and now what is becoming email harassment. This is an example of what you are doing incorrectly.

            The Live Blog thing was an interesting idea, I believe that I pointed that out in a comment at the Reader. However, I had a concern beforehand and a criticism or two afterward. It was obvious that you were going after Horn in that issue where, well, you went after Horn. I pointed it out. And, when I tuned in to the live blog, well, I stated what I noticed.

            Now, if you have an issue with criticism, you have probably chosen the wrong career path. If you have a problem discussing anything without resorting to name-calling, then interacting with readership is probably something you should reconsider. And Dave, I’m not going to tell you again, stop emailing me, for your own good.

      • June 10, 2010 - 3:01 pm 3:01 pm

        How in the world do you describe your comments as respectful? Do you even read yourself?

        The only times I’ve called you names is when you’ve come on here and spouted inaccuracies, falsehoods and miscellaneous bullshit then failed to acknowledge them when you were called out. I can’t help it if you’re oblivious.

        Threaten me if you like–it’s your choice to come on here. And as far as emails go–each one has simply been to get you to come back at take responsibility for spouting nonsense.

        • refriedgringo permalink
          June 10, 2010 - 3:16 pm 3:16 pm

          Look, my first comment was caustic, true. But there were no grave inaccuracies or falsehoods. You claimed to have been balanced and I didn’t see it that way. While I could’ve been nicer about it, I certainly wasn’t an asshole.

          And it is my choice to come on here. It’s also my choice to respond or not to respond. Insulting emails are inappropriate, regardless, email is for more professional correspondence. It’s only a couple of notches away from what got Board canned, and I don’t want to see that happen to you, you actually give this mag a shot at me liking it some day.

        • June 10, 2010 - 3:43 pm 3:43 pm

          If you’re going to come on here call us unbalanced, accuse us of “slobbering” all over ourselves, you’re going to get called out.

          We busted our asses to get a wide arrange of voices. We strived to keep it civil. You go through the live blog, you won’t see us rubbing anything in anyone’s face…..except maybe Labor and the Democrats for boycotting Election Central.

          You might not “see” it that way, but you only saw what you wanted to see: a single line about Horn supporters glaring at our table. We made no insinuation that we were responsible for his run off. Either you knew you were saying something that wasn’t true or you didn’t take the time to make sure you were saying something correct. There are no other words for it: you were either ignorant or dishonest.

          Now, when you sought to prove your point, you cited things that did not exist. You accused me of saying things that I did not. You’re going to get called out because, again, you’re either being ignorant or dishonest. You were either saying something you knew not to be true or you didn’t take the time to check that you were saying something correct.

          We provided a service at our own cost (notice: no advertisements), with a dozen or so people volunteering their time, and you come on here and shit on it. That’s being an asshole.

          What got Board canned were hurtful remarks about a woman’s decision to adopt a child. My one-line emails were telling you to get your ass back on here, man up and eat your words.

          • refriedgringo permalink
            June 10, 2010 - 5:29 pm 5:29 pm

            If you are expecting all positive feedback for whatever version of community service you think you’re performing – otherwise that person is an asshole, a fool, oblivious, and whatever else you wish to call me – then you really aren’t providing much of anything. I would have eventually checked back here regardless, I don’t mind “being called out”. Apparently, you do.

            Tell you what, I’ll refrain from commenting here from now on, and you can refrain from emailing me from now on. That way, you can continue to believe that you’re balanced, and live in whatever rosy world you wish. I’ll continue to be some asshole that is oblivious and doesn’t come back to “own” something.

        • June 10, 2010 - 11:10 pm 11:10 pm

          I accept critical feedback.

          But feedback based on some weird fantasy a troll concocted after spending two minutes on our blog and seeing one tweet …well, that really isn’t worth two shits is it?

          Good riddance, RefriedPunkass.

  7. barryjantz permalink
    June 10, 2010 - 9:58 pm 9:58 pm

    Dave, ignore him.

    • June 10, 2010 - 11:13 pm 11:13 pm

      I’m sick of this coot just talking garbage. Shrug. I think I’m done now. Thanks, Jantz.

  8. fishlovesca permalink
    June 12, 2010 - 12:54 am 12:54 am

    For technical reasons beyond my control, I could not log in as CuddleFish, so had to re-register under this new screenname. Hello Dave!

    In case you hadn’t noticed, and I think you have, refriedgringo is incapable of admitting he’s ever wrong. Please do not waste any more brain cells here or over at The Reader trying to make him admit the obvious.

    I was at David Alvarez’s party over at Los Paisas, he had chartered a bus to carry all of us over to the W, I was too wiped and went home early, and later found out it was a good thing I didn’t go, my friends tell me the bus didn’t come back for them so everyone had to find rides back home! 🙂

    • June 12, 2010 - 10:19 am 10:19 am

      Oh, he’s obviously reality challenged….But if he’s going to talk smack on the Reader’s site, the Reader’s readers oughta have access to what it is he’s talking smack about.

      Wait! So all those people who came over to the W chanting and waving his signs didn’t get a ride back???

      • fishlovesca permalink
        June 12, 2010 - 10:31 am 10:31 am

        Yes, they got rides back, just not on the bus, is my understanding! 🙂

        That’s okay, we love David, and will be back working on the campaign in a few weeks. I hear his campaign manager, Travis, is in Hawai’i. The rest of us here are hard at work on the SEDC thing.

    • June 12, 2010 - 12:28 pm 12:28 pm

      I have temporarily unapproved several comments in response to FishlovesCa for further consideration and moderation. Sorry for any inconvenience or confusion this may cause.

  9. fishlovesca permalink
    June 12, 2010 - 12:41 pm 12:41 pm

    Awww shucks, Dave, I love when my fans writing adoring comments like that! 😀

  10. pistoleropete permalink
    June 12, 2010 - 12:42 pm 12:42 pm

    I got no beef with you, Dave. You agree with censorship, fine. It’s still a free country and you’re entitled to do what you want with your blog. I’m ok with that. It’s kind of hard to be taken serious as a journalist though.

    • June 12, 2010 - 12:47 pm 12:47 pm

      Man, I just don’t know what to do with your comments. All I can do is fully disclose that I unapproved them and then put ’em back up on Monday once I’ve had a chance to bounce ’em off my editor. If they don’t go online again, I’ll explain why.

      • pistoleropete permalink
        June 12, 2010 - 12:50 pm 12:50 pm

        I saw this post in my inbox and hastily reacted. My apologies. If CB boots me, so be it. I don’t give a rat’s ass how many places I get banned on the net. What the banners fail to realize though is simple: They’re banning under but one ISP # 😀

  11. fishlovesca permalink
    June 12, 2010 - 12:46 pm 12:46 pm

    So what was said? Geez, I missed the trollery!

    • pistoleropete permalink
      June 12, 2010 - 12:48 pm 12:48 pm

      Dave is worried you’d sue if he leaves my comments up. He’ll talk to the editors about reposting them. You may get your wish, Cuddles. I didn’t say anything that nobody doesn’t already know though. Don’t you worry your precious little head of snookums.

      • June 12, 2010 - 1:01 pm 1:01 pm

        Just all y’all chill out. Don’t make me think anymore about comment moderation, unapproving users or shutting down posts on a Saturday, y’ hear me? Behave until Monday, please.

        Stay on topic.

        • pistoleropete permalink
          June 12, 2010 - 1:04 pm 1:04 pm

          Because I respect you, I’ll try but I make no guarantees. There is NO love lost between me and some slimy “fish”.

  12. fishlovesca permalink
    June 12, 2010 - 1:05 pm 1:05 pm

    For heaven’s sakes, Dave, let the haters hate!

    You don’t bounce his N-word comments, why bounce whatever sad little drivel he said about me? 🙂

    • pistoleropete permalink
      June 12, 2010 - 1:14 pm 1:14 pm

      Au contraire mon soeur. I beg to differ that it’s drivel. What you fail to realize is there are quite a few Reader readers that hate you as much as I do. They just don’t have the balls to say it. You truly are clueless, aren’t you?

  13. fishlovesca permalink
    June 12, 2010 - 1:38 pm 1:38 pm

    Back to one of the topics, RefriedPunkass guilt kicks in which he plays off as nobility:

  14. June 12, 2010 - 4:36 pm 4:36 pm

    Thanks Pistolero. Thanks Fish. I appreciate it.

  15. June 14, 2010 - 2:06 pm 2:06 pm

    So, we’ve decided not to publish Pistolero Pete’s comments for a few reasons. First, they were off topic and just personal attacks without any context. Second, the language was a step further beyond even our normally vulgarity-tolerant standards. We won’t ban anyone today and that’s a relief to me. Just, in the future, could the regulars (or at least the regulars at the Reader who sometimes visit) please keep the insults and sniping germaine to the issue at hand? Of course, mutual respect and civility would be the ultimate goal, but hey, even we can’t always live up to that standard. (See RefriedPunkass thread)

  16. fishlovesca permalink
    June 14, 2010 - 3:28 pm 3:28 pm

    Thank you for your comments and for your excellent work on election night, Dave. I apologize for any part I may have had in taking this thread off-topic.

  17. pistoleropete permalink
    June 14, 2010 - 3:33 pm 3:33 pm

    So let me get this straight….I’m a bit unclear on this….I can’t call Cuddlefish a cunt but you can call Refried a punkass because the language is too harsh? Are we in fucking kindergarten again? And people wonder why I make fun of this corrupt two-bit resort town…

    • June 14, 2010 - 3:39 pm 3:39 pm

      To me, it was more a matter of it being off topic and a personal attack rather than anything germane. If you had a problem with what she said, I’d probably be OK with it…which is why I won’t delete it now.

      But then again, that all might change once we move over to our forthcoming new platform. It all depends…and of course, there are specific challenges that arise simply by attracting Pistol Pete’s attention.

      Also, as we spoke privately, there was certain other language that made us comfortable, which I won’t get into.

      That said, punkass and cunt aren’t really in the same league of profanity. At least not in my vocabulary.

  18. pistoleropete permalink
    June 14, 2010 - 3:56 pm 3:56 pm

    Dave, Dave, Dave…it’s kind of hard to maintain a level of respect when you post this stuff. ANYTHING that is typed by Cuddlefish is off topic. Go over to the Reader and you’ll see complete strangers who probably haven’t had any contact with her call her a twit. The level of stupidity that rolls forth from her brain is astounding.

    Look at me like Howard Stern or Fox News. EVIL things in life that we MUST look at because the opposite would be more horrendous. I’m like a really tragic car accident involving a family of rodeo midgets. You don’t want to look. You know you shouldn’t look but… just can’t help yourself.

    Any website that bans me for anything offensive just took a hit in their web numbers. I’m not saying I’m the internet messiah. Far from it, Dave. I DO have an effect on internet visitors though. I’m not afraid to “say” the things I feel I have to “say” and that scares people.

    It’s ok though. Sometime in the next few days I’ll be taking my sideshow over to YouTube. They only ban you if use too many songs from UMG or WMG. You’ll see the Sean Hannity effect I have on people.

    • June 14, 2010 - 4:07 pm 4:07 pm

      In this case her comment wasn’t off topic. It directly addressed election night. Your comment, though, was just an insult based on some other encounter. If you’re gonna go off on her, all I ask is that you address what she said.

      Either way, we may beef up our policies going into the new blog. We’ll let you know.

      In any event, can we close this case for now? I’m really looking forward to your video blog. Tip me off to it via email when I goes live and I’ll blog about it.

      • pistoleropete permalink
        June 14, 2010 - 4:23 pm 4:23 pm

        It barely touched on Election Night. The only thing I got out of what she said was that Refried was wrong and “Look at how cool I am to suck off the Democratic politicians”. What’s so grand about that?

        Believe me, I wanted to ask a few of those politicians some hardball questions. I didn’t though. It wasn’t my place and I don’t roll like that. I’d rather address these issues on my own in my own way, with my own words.

        I’ll definetely send you a link you can put up. I’ll take any and all advertising.

        Also, Dave? Don’t take my criticism personal. We all know you have to serve your Master. It’s part of the game. And like I said earlier, I won’t directly flame anyone just to be an asshole. As an example of the things I’m talking about discussing, check this out:

        Congressman Bob Etheridge D-North Carolina

        I’d like to see those students try and get away with that if the roles were reversed…

    • pistoleropete permalink
      June 14, 2010 - 11:07 pm 11:07 pm

      “Any website that bans me for anything offensive just took a hit in their web numbers. I’m not saying I’m the internet messiah. Far from it, Dave. I DO have an effect on internet visitors though. I’m not afraid to “say” the things I feel I have to “say” and that scares people.”

      I rest my case your Honor…check out comment # 58 from SurfPuppy619:

      SP? If you come back to re-read this thread, I won’t be back to The Reader. They banned me and that’s that. I have other avenues to get my words out. I’ll be back. Just not on The Reader. Keep readin’ Dave’s blogs. Sometime soon either he or I will post up a link to my new YouTube Channel. Now that I’ll own the media, NOBODY can ban me!

    • santacruzin permalink
      June 15, 2010 - 10:54 am 10:54 am

      I must correct you on one point, pete. I’ve had plenty of contact with cuddletwit, and with you to, just not under my current nom de guerre . Iv’e been around here longer than both of you. In fact, she used to email me quite frequently when you and I would spar on various subjects, mistakenly thinking I was going after you.. To be honest, I don’t take either one of you more seriously than the other. But I do give you props for saying what’s on your mind without regard as to whether anyone agrees, unlike someone who feels as if her approval or disapproval is the end all verdict. Truth is , I could give a krap about either of you and what your opinions are, but at least you supply a little humor mixed in with your angst.

      • pistoleropete permalink
        June 15, 2010 - 11:23 am 11:23 am

        Thanks SurfPuppy. I don’t even take my self as serious as most people think I do. I don’t type the things I type to make anyone happy or to be popular. I type them because I think they need to be typed. When being politically correct became the norm, we as a country lost our voice. For example, I’m totally for Arizona’s SB 1070. While typing this, I’m listening to CBS 8 News @ 11. They are reporting that Arizona is now considering a new bill that would ban any children born to illegal aliens. I’m against this. Why, people might ask? It’s simple. I’m a Constitutionalist. As much as I agree with the ban on principle, I cannot in my heart and love for our Constitution support something that is blantenly illegal. ANYTHING, whether I agree with it or not, that is against the Constitution, I cannot support. Call it an aversion to hypocrisy.

        • santacruzin permalink
          June 15, 2010 - 12:06 pm 12:06 pm

          Sorry pete, but I’m not surfpuppy. Can’t stand lawyers.

          • pistoleropete permalink
            June 15, 2010 - 12:15 pm 12:15 pm

            Touche. My apologies then. I just naturally assumed.

  19. santacruzin permalink
    June 15, 2010 - 12:13 pm 12:13 pm

    One question for you, Pete. In your comment, you claimed to be a constitutionalist, that “ANYTHING, whether I agree with it or not, that is against the Constitution, I cannot support.”
    Are you familiar with Article I, Section 8?

    • pistoleropete permalink
      June 15, 2010 - 12:19 pm 12:19 pm

      I wasn’t familar with it off hand but I looked it up. I have read up on this a few years ago. I’m not sure what your question is though.

      • santacruzin permalink
        June 15, 2010 - 12:21 pm 12:21 pm

        Fair enough. Then are you familiar with the 16th Amendment?

        • pistoleropete permalink
          June 15, 2010 - 12:30 pm 12:30 pm

          I am but again, I’m not sure where this is leading.

          • santacruzin permalink
            June 15, 2010 - 11:29 pm 11:29 pm

            Hey there, pistolero. I have to admit I am somewhat surprised. Despite your occasional want to go on an epithet laced diatribe, I generally consider you quite intelligent person who is not afraid to speak his mind.
            While reading your comment above, a couple of questions came to mind. I thought you’d be able to follow, but let me clarify.
            Obviously, you know that Article 1, Section 8 of the U.S. Constitution defines the powers of Congress. Preeminent among those powers is that the Congress shall have” Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises.” Plain enough.
            The 16th Amendment came about because a SCOTUS ruling essentially said that taxes on income from property should be treated as direct taxes. This made it difficult for Congress to impose an income tax that applied to all forms of income (Article 1 Section 9 says “No capitation, or other direct, Tax shall be laid, unless in Proportion to the Census or Enumeration herein before directed to be taken.”) After the 16th Amendment, no Federal income taxes are required to be apportioned, regardless of whether they are direct taxes (taxes on income from property) or indirect taxes (all other income taxes).
            In other words, the 16th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, allows, despite what some say, for income taxes to be collected. A little simplified perhaps, but you get the point.
            So the first question I had while reading your post was your comment “I cannot in my heart and love for our Constitution support something that is blatantly illegal. ANYTHING, whether I agree with it or not, that is against the Constitution, I cannot support. Call it an aversion to hypocrisy.”
            I find myself wondering how you can actually say with a (presumably) straight face. You take great pride in the fact that you are a self admitted tax cheat. The very creation of your ID theft scam was for the sole purpose of not paying income tax. You have said you avoid paying any taxes you can and advocate for others to do the same. Your very statement itself is paradigm of hypocrisy. I was just wondering how you reason that one out.
            Also I was curious, based on your remarks about Arizona’s SB1070, if you had changed your stance on illegal immigration. I believed at one point you labeled yourself a “quasi-racist”, on the fence about illegal immigration, but with a soft spot for Mexicans. It seems that may have changed?? Just curious, that’s all.

  20. fishlovesca permalink
    June 15, 2010 - 5:38 pm 5:38 pm

    Hello (to the ironically named) maninthemirror! I must correct one error — we did not correspond frequently — actually, as I recall, once or twice.

    Would anyone care for some cheese with the very long whine in the last few posts on this thread?:

    • santacruzin permalink
      June 15, 2010 - 11:29 pm 11:29 pm

      Ah, cuddlefish, the ever-present and all knowing resident queen of approval. I hate to risk your wrath by contradicting you, but there have many instances of witty repartee between us. As you’ll notice, my current nom de guerre has been in use for barely 2 months. But I have been around much, much longer than that, at least as long as the esteemed Mr. Bauder has been posting his blogs for comment which I believe extends back to late 2003-early 2004. I simply choose to change my identity on a frequent basis. Like many other posters at the reader, I simply prefer to keep my anonymity. Nothing nefarious by design, simply the result of an experience my family went thru some years ago, similar to that of refriedgringo. Only in our case, it necessitated the involvement of law enforcement and the judicial system. Fortunately, as they say, all’s well that ends well. And actually, I have nothing at all personal against you; I don’t know you and you don’t know me. You’re just an anonymous writer as far as I am concerned. As such, should I feel compelled to occasionally comment on your self aggrandizing, holier than thou style of commenting, you are surely entitled to respond in kind. I don’t take it personally, because, apparently unlike some others, none of the opinions of ANY of the people comment have any meaning to me. Just curious though. I’m not sure what you mean by your “Hello (to the ironically named) maninthemirror” remark. I choose each of my names for a particular personal reason. In this case, it happens to be one of my g/f’s favorite songs.

      • June 15, 2010 - 11:36 pm 11:36 pm

        I hope all this inter-commentator chatter moves onto Pistol Pete’s video blog once he gets the thing started. Hurry up, Pete!

        • santacruzin permalink
          June 15, 2010 - 11:39 pm 11:39 pm

          No why in the world would we do that? It’s WAY more fun to do it here!!!

          • June 15, 2010 - 11:47 pm 11:47 pm

            Is it? I didn’t realize.

          • santacruzin permalink
            June 16, 2010 - 10:00 am 10:00 am

            Perhaps, just perhaps, therein lies the problem. It sounds suspiciously like you are suffering from a malady that seems to strike many people who write for a living in a public forum such as this: taking ones self way too seriously. I have been told that usually the first symptom is a loss of ones sense of humor, which seems to fit. Then next comes ones lose of realization of what’s happening in the world around them. I don’t have any personal experience with this affliction, for as my gf and daughter tell me quite frequently, I don’t take anything seriously of it doesn’t involve diminishing numbers in the bank account. And even that isn’t accurate in the sense that I learned a long time ago that the second best ways to keep my ladies happy is to let them think they can have anything they want. Once they think that, it apparently isn’t as much of a challenge and they really don’t care as much. And that would by my strictly unproffessional advice to you as well. If there are people on your blog whose presence you truly can’t appreciate, even for just paying the slightest bit of attention to what you have to say, the njust ignore them/us and maybe, just maybe they/we will go away….Or not.

  21. pistoleropete permalink
    June 16, 2010 - 1:55 am 1:55 am

    Well santacruzin…you’ve got me over a barrel on those points. The tax fraud scheme I see as an act of civil disobediance to an otherwise fucked up tax code. Like you said though, all’s well that ends well. Maybe I’ll tell you what happened in a personal message when I get my new YT channel geared up. It’s kind of ironic to say the least.

    As for illegal immigration, I still do have a soft spot for Mexicans and I am still quasi-racist(I call myself that because there really is no better word that I can think of or find). AZ SB 1070 is a bit of a FUBAR double edged sword for all of us on both sides of the fence. Maybe I’ll do a video on it rather than type out some long winded response that maybe 20 people read(my apologies to Dave).

    All I know is there has to be a better way than the way we’re going. At least politically. I’ll scream from the rooftops, “HANG ALL FUCKIN’ QUEERBAIT LIBERALS BY THEIR BALLS!” Then, I’ll promply sit down with one. I guess you could say that my bark really IS worse than my bite. Maybe it’s because I feel passionately about this for once in my miserable life. It’s hard to care about happens in Arizona when you’re a teenager who is drunk and stoned in the Midwest. Sobering up sure made me one miserablr son of a bitch at times…

    Speaking of which, I want to punch every government worker I saw today. Instead, I went to Acapulco’s and drank my first ever margarita. Fucker was so tasty, I had a second one.
    Perhaps I AM hypocritical. I’ve been called much worse. 😀

    • santacruzin permalink
      June 16, 2010 - 10:36 am 10:36 am

      I’m curious, pete as to what you mean by ” AZ SB 1070 is a bit of a FUBAR double edged sword for all of us on both sides of the fence”. I was born in Az, although thank god my dad got a promotion that brought us back to SD when I was about 2; I don’t have many memories of then. I did go back to go to school though. I received both of my BA’s and 1 of Masters from the University of Arizona. I also have a cousin who lives in Scottsdale. We own a couple of properties together so I do spend some time there and have had my own “experiences”. So I’m curious as to the thoughts of a “quasi-racist, formerly drunk and stoned Midwesterner currently living in SD and apparently hating it” when it comes to Az’s immigration issues. BTW, politics have very little to do with it. It’s all about money.

      • pistoleropete permalink
        June 16, 2010 - 2:10 pm 2:10 pm

        Well, the FUBAR double edged sword is pretty obvious. It’s been talked about plenty over the years. If we were to somehow kick out all the illegal Mexicans(I’ll get to why I singled them out in a moment), they couldn’t get bennies. Less tax money to pay for them. However, and this is why the Republicans are keeping their traps shut on this issue(at least for the most part), if we grant them amnesty, we’ll have cheaper produce.

        I single out Mexicans for one reason and one reason only:OBNOXIOUS ENTITLEMENT! Yes, you read that right. Mexicans are the ONLY race on the planet to brazenly break our laws regarding immigration and wave their Mexican flags oh so enthusiastically. THAT pisses me off. I can break ANY law here in America and feel entitled to do so because of my birthright. I am an American citizen. They are not.

        I understand why they come here. Mexico for the most part is a 3rd world shithole. I’ve talked to Refried many times about this and he has softened my stance somewhat on Mexico. Beautiful country but corrupt to it’s very core. However, it doesn’t give them the right to cross over illegally and take my country’s kindness as a weakness because Americans are too fuckin’ lazy to pick lettuce in 100 degree heat. Two weeks ago before I found a bartender’s school, I had been looking for work for a YEAR AND A HALF. I would pick heads of lettuce in 100 degree heat. Just not for $5.00 an hour. Fuck that. I’m willing to shovel horseshit and give it 110% as long as I get at least minimum wage.

        There is no REAL solution to the complex issue of illegal immigration. I’ll never say there is one. I just don’t think amnesty is the answer. All amnesty does is encourage illegal behavior. Would you, santacruzin, advocate that my tax fraud be swept under the rug? Didn’t think so and now you see my side of the coin. Illegal is illegal is illegal is illegal is illegal is illegal is illegal…

        • santacruzin permalink
          June 16, 2010 - 4:18 pm 4:18 pm

          Pete, the best way that I can translate your answer is that you agree it’s about the money. That it will cost less by not having to pay for social services, but cost more replacing them with U.S. workers will be more expensive. Is my interpretation correct?
          You also seem to feel, by what I read in your last 3 sentences, that you believe that I support either illegal immigration and/or amnesty? If so, wrong in both cases. I do find a couple of your remarks disconcerting though. First, your remark about cheaper lettuce is both quasi-racist and only somewhat correct. The majority of illegal immigrants are not just produce workers and I think you know that. And estimates on the rise in produce prices ranges from 3-6 % in the short term to about ½ of that after a year or so, depending upon the season and the region. Second is your reference to Americans being lazy to pick lettuce in 100 degree heat and that you would pick heads of lettuce in 100 degree heat just not for $5.00 an hour. How badly would you have to need the money to do it? It seems that what you’re really saying is that you’re too good to do that, but if some illegal wants to, then let them or someone else, just not you. So of course that’s what starts the problem of illegal immigrants coming here, to do the jobs that some people feel they are “too good” to do. The irony in that is the law of supply and demand. If more Americans did those kinds of jobs, illegal immigrants would not show up and wages would increase. Cesar Chavez is the perfect example. He co-founded the UFW in the 60’s and in the ‘70s, organized strikes and boycotts to protest for, and win, higher wages for those farm workers. He was also committed to restricting immigration, both legal and illegal. Simply put, his position was that if growers could bring in cheap labor, his members wouldn’t have jobs and the cheap labor wouldn’t complain because they would be gone. In this case, just reverse things.
          Also, you simply can’t single out Mexicans because you don’t like them. It’s everybody or nobody. I personally know immigrants from a handful of countries on 4 continents. One couple are LPRs and the rest have become naturalized citizens. In fact, one of them could be your girlfriend’s GYNOB and you would never have a clue. But if she were illegal, she would have to go like all the rest.
          And of course, your entire second paragraph is patently racist. To say that Mexicans are displaying “OBNOXIOUS ENTITLEMENT” and are brazenly breaking our immigration laws and waving their Mexican flags “oh so enthusiastically” has to be one of the most ridiculous things you have ever posted. As of 2008 30 % of the San Diego County, 33% of the Orange County and 47% of the Los Angeles County populations were of Hispanic or Latino origin. So you think all of them who wave their Mexican flags “oh so enthusiastically” are illegal, because that’s what you’re saying. Two of the couples we know are from Europe. They are HUGE soccer fans and I can tell you they are waving their home country’s flags “oh so enthusiastically”. Oh, by the way, they all obtained their citizenship at least 15 yrs ago. The just happen to be proud of the countries they were born in. Apparently that notion escapes you at some level.
          Would I advocate that my tax fraud be swept under the rug? To be honest, I don’t really care about something so trivial. I am a firm believer in Karma. Not the new age, pop culture version that is colloquially summed up as “what goes around comes around.” I believe the more spiritual version, that karma is inherent to the spirit, whether incarnated or not and the consequences of the acts committed by the spirit last beyond the physical life and into the afterlife and that in this life, nothing happens to a person that he or she does not for some reason or other deserve.

          • pistoleropete permalink
            June 16, 2010 - 4:42 pm 4:42 pm

            Hmmmm….where to begin? I think you get most of what I’m trying to convey but not all of it. Before all this shit kicked off in Arizona, you’d see illegal immigrants protesting in the street waving the Mexican flag. “VIVA LA RAZA! VIVA MEXICO!” was a common thing heard on the nightly news. I’m talking about obnoxious protesters and your talking about soccer hooligans. HUGE difference. I just got a call from my GF and now I want to punch retarded Indonesian kids in the forehead so maybe I’ll try and address this again later.

          • santacruzin permalink
            June 16, 2010 - 6:08 pm 6:08 pm

            Pete, I get every thing you’re saying, but apparently, as happens quite often, you don’t get everything you’re saying. No need to address it later, it’s done. I’ll close with 2 comments. First you didn’t refer to “illegal immigrants protesting in the street waving the Mexican flag”. You referred to Mexicans as a race of people brazenly breaking immigration laws and waving their Mexican flags “oh so enthusiastically”
            HUGE difference.
            And as for my friends, 2 couples hanging the flags of their home countries during the World Cup, is not being “soccer hooligans”.
            As I said, some things just seem to escape you.

  22. pistoleropete permalink
    June 16, 2010 - 9:27 pm 9:27 pm

    Ummm…..maybe I missed something but Mexicans ARE a race of people who brazenly break our immigration laws and wave their Mexican flag oh so enthusiastically in our faces while claiming they deserve non-existant rights. As for your friends, I was being facetious. You tried to compare illegals waving their flags during protests with your friends who put up flags for the World Cup and immigrated legally.

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: