Whistleblower hotline: (213) 785-6098
mayorsam@mayorsam.org

Friday, September 08, 2006

Open Thread for Friday

This old, dead, Republican Mayor is taking a cue from our City Clowncil members and playing hooky for Friday (hey I'm only taking one, they took three weeks worth!).

So use this space to chat about Measure R, the Neighborhood Councils, Zuma Dogg, The Revolution, the Mayor, the LAUSD takeover, or whatever else strikes your fancy.

And I am sure our other bloggers will be contributing between now and Monday.

Watch out LA! They must be afraid! Mayor Sam has teamed up with Zuma Dogg, Walter Moore, Councilman John, Joe B. and Jennifer Solis. Between each of us, we will be sure to piss someone off daily.

And we wouldn't have it any other way.

Labels:

51 Comments:

Anonymous Anonymous said:

No one in City Hall has been afraid of this blog since last year. Correct me if I'm wrong, Mayor Sam, but it seems you currently lack an "insider" connection in the 4th floor.

You guys do manage to piss-off just about everybody. Don't know how that's gonna bring about the revolution, though.

September 07, 2006 10:30 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Mayor Sam why don't you Piss Off.

September 07, 2006 11:36 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Hey 10:30,
Obviously SOMEONE from City Hall sees a need to read Mayor Sam since you posted such a silly remark as yours.

If you City Hall-ites were so disinterested and unthreatened, you'd stop blogging and do, gosh I don't know... some real work. Wow! What a concept- to actually do something for the paycheck you earn! But then again maybe you cannot handle the fact you might have to use the gray matter between your ears for once.

September 07, 2006 11:37 PM  

Anonymous Chuck Mangione said:

Will the 4th floor be pancaked?

September 08, 2006 12:11 AM  

Blogger Zuma Dogg said:

Why not take this opportunity to present to The Mayor some ideas that he could work with LAUSD.

People say there is no public input, and there isn't.

But if you have some suggestions, especially as parents, why not post it here, instead of discussion about each other.

I've been told the classrooms are overcrowded and need to be reduced to about 25 student per classroom.

The teachers have no power and are reduced to being babysitters, the parents blame the school instead of taking charge of their kids.

And the kids are scared to go to and from school, cause the streets are more dangerous than inside the schools. (How about some safe passage. Talk to Bratton.)

And other comments?
ZD

September 08, 2006 12:20 AM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Suggestions:
1. Get rid of LAUSD
2. Give Vouchers to families
3. Let the competition Begin
4. No Midget Mayor allowed to rule any school.

September 08, 2006 12:24 AM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Zuma
Go read your emails.

September 08, 2006 12:54 AM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

QUestions about LANCC

Was LANCC created from the City Charter like the Neighborhood Councils?

Is it legal for Neighborhood Councils under the City Charter to transfer their power to LANCC?

Does LANCC have to abide by the brown act?

Are the meetings of LANCC open to the public?

The question is does LANCC have the power to represent the neighborhood councils since the neighborhood council system was created by the City Charter and not LANCC?

These are questions that need to be answered.

There may be cause for litigation against LANCC for claiming to represent the neighbohrood councils if they are not created by the City Charter?

I think these are serious questions that need to be answered.

September 08, 2006 4:59 AM  

Blogger dgarzila said:

http://www.lanccongress.org/events.htm

The C O N G R E S S

Next meeting of LANCC Senate

The Senate of the Los Angeles Neighborhood Councils Congress
is scheduled to hold its next meeting

Saturday, September 9, 2006.
10:00am
DWP Bldg, 111 N. Hope St, Los Angeles

Agenda
Senate Agenda
September 9, 2006
(10 a.m.)
LADWP Building (Portland Rm)
Hope & First Streets, Los Angeles
1. Call to order and roll call
2. Public Comment (2 minutes per speaker) (15 min)
Public comments on non-agenda items
3. Approval of the minutes
4. Reports: NC’s re motions/communications to LANCC (10 min)
a. Coastal San Pedro No-Confidence Vote on DONE GM-B. Gelfand
b. Other Neighborhood Councils
Action may be required
5. Organization & Structure Committee (15 min)
Report/Recommendations/Proposed rules changes
Action required
6. Reports-General
a. Proposition R (the issue/law suit status) – J Jacobberger (15 min)
b. Council File Number Status (5 min)
c. NC/DWP MOU Renewal-G Baratta (10 min)
d. LANCC Public Assembly-A O’Niell/B Westwater (15 min)
e. Non-Profit (501c3) Status-L Dar/D Straus (5 min)
f. Executive Committee Special Meeting-A O’Niell (10 min)
Action may be required
7. Discussion/Motions
a. Create LANCC Transportation Committee-B Westwater (5 min)
b. NC Congress of Neighborhoods-Planning (10 min)
c. Automatic NC Membership in LANCC-M Villegas (10 min)
d. Initiatives Undertaken by DONE without NC Input (10 min)
e. NC Participation in Selection of next DONE GM (10 min)
f. NC Seat at the CRA Table-B Gelfand (10 min)
Action may be required
8. New Business (10 min)
9. Public Comment (2 min per speaker) (10 min)
10. Future Agenda Items (5 min)
Action may be required
11. Adjourn
?????
Next LANCC Senate Meeting: October 7, 2006 (10 a.m.)

September 08, 2006 6:13 AM  

Blogger dgarzila said:

Appaerently the LANC has been acting on behalf of neighborhood councils without their direct permission.

Thus they are modifying one of their own rules.

and or
5. Language such as the following: “The LANCC Senate recommends that neighborhood councils adopt a motion supporting the following position: . . .” Although the LANCC Senate may not take substantive positions on behalf of member neighborhood councils, it may recommend a specific position to its member neighborhood councils.


So poster above it looks like the LANC may be closing the loop on you which you could have litigated against them.

September 08, 2006 6:18 AM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Garcetti says,"At the end of the day, there is a fundamental question of whether we trust voters or whether they should be babied."
NO!
The fundamental question is: Do the voters trust the Clowncil and should they be kicked in ass?

September 08, 2006 7:49 AM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

1030PM - I work on the 4th floor and send stuff to MS regularly. You just don't know what the fuck you're talking about do you? There are plenty of staffers pissed at their bosses who are more than happy to use MS to get back.

September 08, 2006 8:06 AM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

No insider blogs at MS

September 08, 2006 8:39 AM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Hi all, this is they guy from 10:30.

Well I was only making an observation about the state of current affairs on this blog, in no way was I trying to disparage it. I did aknowledge that the blog is succesfull in ruffling the feathers of Council and Mayoral operatives, especially in terms of NC issues. I commend the Mayor Sam on that.

But my main point was that there hasn't been many "scoops" per-se on this blog for a while. While people like 8:06 AM still email Sam with tips, there has been nothing major revealed on this site for a while. Notice the word major. Tips are published hear all the time, but nothing scares folks in City Hall nowadays.

Last year was a different story. From the Mayor and Council races, to everyday life in the 4th floor, you never knew when someone was gonna spill the beans and embarrass people. Occurrances like those are few and far between now.

So please, don't be mad at me for making this observation guys. ;)

September 08, 2006 8:50 AM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Hi all, this is they guy from 10:30.

Well I was only making an observation about the state of current affairs on this blog, in no way was I trying to disparage it. I did aknowledge that the blog is succesfull in ruffling the feathers of Council and Mayoral operatives, especially in terms of NC issues. I commend the Mayor Sam on that.

But my main point was that there hasn't been many "scoops" per-se on this blog for a while. While people like 8:06 AM still email Sam with tips, there has been nothing major revealed on this site for a while. Notice the word major. Tips are published hear all the time, but nothing scares folks in City Hall nowadays.

Last year was a different story. From the Mayor and Council races, to everyday life in the 4th floor, you never knew when someone was gonna spill the beans and embarrass people. Occurrances like those are few and far between now.

So please, don't be mad at me for making this observation guys. ;)

September 08, 2006 8:50 AM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

And the answers please!

"QUestions about LANCC"

Q. Was LANCC created from the City Charter like the Neighborhood Councils?"

A. There is no need for any caucus or association of NC leaders to be approved by the Charter. This is like the Gay & Lesbian Caucus of NC leaders, or the Valley Alliance of Neighborhood Councils.

Q. Is it legal for Neighborhood Councils under the City Charter to transfer their power to LANCC?

A. The NCs aren't transferring their powers so this isn't an issue. You just made it up.

Q. Does LANCC have to abide by the brown act?

A. No. It wasn't created by an act of a legislative body, and it doesn't include a majority of an NC's board members.

Q. Are the meetings of LANCC open to the public?

A. They don't have to be.

Q. The question is does LANCC have the power to represent the neighborhood councils since the neighborhood council system was created by the City Charter and not LANCC?

A. They aren't representing all the NCs. They are representing the NCs who send delegates.

Q. These are questions that need to be answered.
There may be cause for litigation against LANCC for claiming to represent the neighbohrood councils if they are not created by the City Charter?

Q. I think these are serious questions that need to be answered.

A. My guess is that you are either someone who fears the increasing power that NC's are gathering, or you're someone whose approach is to destroy that which you cannot control.

September 08, 2006 8:54 AM  

Blogger Zuma Dogg said:

WHAT SUCKS ABOUT COUNCIL BEING SO SHADY, THAT "R" GOT REMOVED:

Council is so unethical, of course "R" got removed...And at what expense: NO ETHICS REFORM NOW.

SO HERE'S MY RELENTLESS CHALLENGE/GAUNTLET I WILL BE THROWING DOWN AT COUNCIL MEETING NEXT WEEK.

Alright LOSERS (City Council)...You were so illegal and out of bounds on "R", the whole thing was actually removed from the ballot. So, now the PEOPLE lose "Ethics/Lobby Reform" as a result of your "Un-ethical" behavior.

BUT, Rocky Delgadillio did tell us all, that "Ethics Reform" can be voted in by Council as a simple agenda item.

CITY COUNCIL...IF YOU DO NOT MAKE IT UP TO THE PEOPLE OF THIS CITY, BY PASSING "ETHICS REFORM" AS AN AGENDA ITEM, IN TIME FOR THE MARCH ELECTIONS...YOU WILL WISH YOU WERE SELLING $1 INCENSE ON VENICE BEACH AND NEVER GOT INTO POLITICS.

I REPEAT, PASS ETHICS REOFRM AS AN AGENDA ITEM, AS ROCKY SAID YOU COULD...OR SUFFER THE WORST OF POLIITCAL REPERCUSSIONS. It will be extremely uncofortable, for you if not. WORD!

Remember, YOU (Council) work for The People...and that's what we're telling you to do. So DO IT, and quit embarassing yourselves at the mic and keyboard of a rapper from Venice Beach, fools.

Zuma Dogg
aka: Mr. If You Don't Pass "Ethics Reform" As An Agenda Item, Y'all Will Wish You Were Never Born.

September 08, 2006 8:59 AM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

RE: the addition of Zuma

Let's see,

Jennifer Solis = brains, savvy, relevant life experience.

Zuma = loud mouth overcompensating for apparently poorly endowed package.

Looks like Mayor Sam operates by the same hiring standard as Mayor AV.

Hahahahahahhahah!

September 08, 2006 9:04 AM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Hahahahahahahhaahahahhahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha!

Hahahahahahahhaahahahhahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha!

Hahahahahahahhaahahahhahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha!

Hahahahahahahhaahahahhahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha!

Hee hee hee...Hahahahahahahhaahahahhahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha!

September 08, 2006 9:06 AM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Zuma Dogg....

Why are you complaining that there will be "NO ETHICS REFORM NOW"?

There WILL BE ETHICS REFORM when Villagrossa, Nunez, Cedillo, and all the other anti-American Mexicans are thrown out on their collective asses!

The daily rush hour gridlock caused by too many millions of illegals and their amigos has backfired on the Clown Clowncil! Because we are stuck in traffic every day for hours....we can listen to the REAL HEROES...the talk jocks!!!!!!!!!!

The talk jocks are doing more to expose the corruption and reconquista than Mayor S or anyone else!

I love to be stuck in traffic now...3 hours of THE TRUTH coming out. Everyone is awake now...in more ways than one. This election will prove our displeasure and you will see heads roll and balloot measures go down in flames!

Thanks, talk jocks!!!!!!!!!!

September 08, 2006 9:17 AM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Mayor Sam

Are you crazy????

Jennifer Solis???????

She is one of "them", for Gawd's sake!

September 08, 2006 9:21 AM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

....But within hours, City Attorney Rocky Delgadillo's office filed an emergency appeal in an effort to keep the measure alive past today's deadline for printing the ballot.

This is bullshit and Rocky needs to be told. Again, our tax dollars wasted on the Clowncil members even after a judge ruled. In today's Daily News now all of a sudden Zine wants to include a debate with NC's. Go figure!!! Idiots should have done that in the first place. How can Rocky be so damn hypocritical??? His legal opinion states Prop R is deceiving now he's going to argue to leave it on the ballot???? NO WONDER HE GOT SLAUGHTERED IN HIS ELECTION

September 08, 2006 9:34 AM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Rocky HAS to argue the case! He is the City Attorney!



The story is finally coming out as to the stunt AV and Angelides pulled the other day. Those poor kids were used as pawns!!!!!

Just like AV's State of the State "speech" at another SCHOOL!

This is a form of child abuse and he should be prosecuted!!!! How low can you get...using little kids for your own selfish agenda???

He's no better than a pedophile!

September 08, 2006 10:06 AM  

Blogger Zuma Dogg said:

9:14AM, hilarious!

RE 9:34: "In today's Daily News now all of a sudden Zine wants to include a debate with NC's. Go figure!!! Idiots should have done that in the first place."

If this is true, don't criticize the guy, and maybe only one trying to do what we are asking them to do. It's still a little early to be patting anyone on the back, or giving hugs at McArthur Park, but if we're fighting for change, we have to be aware if change is happening so people can move foward, like we want to, instead of being stuck in a redundant pattern of protesting superflously.

So I hope that sh*t you're referring to is true.
ZD

September 08, 2006 10:24 AM  

Blogger Zuma Dogg said:

9:14AM, hilarious!

RE 9:34: "In today's Daily News now all of a sudden Zine wants to include a debate with NC's. Go figure!!! Idiots should have done that in the first place."

If this is true, don't criticize the guy, and maybe only one trying to do what we are asking them to do. It's still a little early to be patting anyone on the back, or giving hugs at McArthur Park, but if we're fighting for change, we have to be aware if change is happening so people can move foward, like we want to, instead of being stuck in a redundant pattern of protesting superflously.

So I hope that sh*t you're referring to is true.
ZD

September 08, 2006 10:25 AM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Zuma, put down the doobie... pay attention to what you're posting... ah!idiot...

September 08, 2006 10:35 AM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Where's that sot Archie Bunker ??

September 08, 2006 10:44 AM  

Blogger Parque Esqueleto said:

Ethics, schmethics. . . they never got any of my clients anyplace.

What's to reform? You've either have ethics, or you don't.

And, if you got 'em, take your business elsewhere. I'm up to just about any challenge - inventing accomplishments, covering up adolescent (or even last year's) indiscretions, re-inventing the "heel" - you name it.

But there's no margin in pumping someone with an internalized code of ethics -- they go all "proper" on you just when you need them to puncture the jugular. Plus, ethics laws are just low-hanging soft fruit for campaign roadies like me toss at the other guy when he gets too close.

You want to put me out of business? Support Prop "LH" (for "late hit"), and put a "quiet period" of 4-6 weeks around elections, when a candidate's opponents can't trick authorities into opening up an "investigation" that's then leaked to the media the week before the vote (and disappears mysteriously two weeks after).

Get that passed, and I'd be packed in nothing flat, and moved to Katrina-ville, where they respect dirty politics!

September 08, 2006 12:46 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

9:04 Jennifer please!
Her daddy is Villaraigosa kiss ass.
Double agent work don't cut it.

September 08, 2006 12:55 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

From Citywatch, the ultimate hypocrisy...

"...said attorney Jacobberger, 'NCs are simply trying to stand up for making sure
the little guy has the same opportunity to shape legislation as the Chamber of Commerce.'"


"Little guy" Jacobberger? In what alernate reality?

If by that he means, the 50 or so elitist uppercrusters that voted in his NC board, then "little" is the right word... but what HE represents is the LITTLEST of littles, the 1/10th of 1 percent of his NC area that the NC ACTUALLY represents based on recent voting.

In better terms NOBODY!

(Who speaking for the other 49,950?) Admit it, it's the councilmember, who got 20 times as many votes, and whose staff works with more people and across much more diverse ranges of them, than any NC.

Rich unmandated attorneys talking BS about the "little guy" -- ain't that a pisher.


NCs run by boards elected by sub-sub-single digit turnouts are the ultimate "special interest" groups, more so than the average homeowners guild (only in this case, FUNDED by the city taxpayer!)

September 08, 2006 1:48 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Measure R ruling overturned! Measure R will be on the November Ballot!

THIS IS ALL OUT WAR!

September 08, 2006 2:23 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

I hope that last post is bogus. Any word on the appeal??? I thought today was the last day to decide if it stays off the ballot.

September 08, 2006 3:06 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

If, and only if that's true, then:

WAHHHH. WAHHHH. WAHHHH, NC's LOST (not really, just the obviously lousy lawyers/CM-wannabes/unrepresentative reps with the big mouths... the under 1 percenters - THEY lost), and the real leaders of real mandated, representative NCs never missed a beat, working at home to improve things, fix city services for their stakeholders and HELP their elected officials (not replace them).

Lyonalgbergnelson LOST! Couldn't have happened to a "nicer" virtual law firm.

WAHHHH. WAHHHH. WAHHHH.


Back atcha! (s'only right!)

September 08, 2006 3:11 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Wahhh, Wahhh, bugger, it's TRUE (and Roderick BEAT you to it this time, Mailander)

Measure R comes back
Kevin Roderick
The state's 2nd District Court of Appeals stayed a judge's order yesterday that the City Council's term limits measure should be taken off the November ballot. It stays on pending an Oct. 3 hearing on the merits — though at that point it would be too late to strike the issue from printed ballot materials. Election law expert Rick Hasen explains here why the court acted.


http://electionlawblog.org/archives/006690.html


September 08, 2006
Breaking News; Meaure R Back on the Ballot...For Now
See the last two entries here. I suggested yesterday that the city ask for a stay of the trial court's order removing Measure R from the ballot pending a further look at the issue. This is the only way to preserve the status quo (because otherwise Measure R will not appear in the ballot materials---or there would at least have to be a supplemental mailing).

The city did ask for such an order. The Court of Appeal just issued an order staying the lower court order, and ordering oral argument on Oct. 3 in this case. This makes very good sense. Still time before the election to decide if the single subject rule applies to measures placed on the ballot by the city council and, if so, whether this measure violates the single subject rule. I put the chances of reversal of the trial court order here as high on the first issue, but low on the second issue if the court finds that the single subject rule indeed applies.

September 08, 2006 3:22 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

And the DN gets it, too (now why don't Lyonalgbergnelson "get it"? BECAUSE they don't REPRESENT anyone but their own ambitions.)

Proposition R back on November ballot

By Kerry Cavanaugh, Staff Writer

Daily News

An appeals court cleared the way today for Proposition R, the Los Angeles City Council's term limits/ethics reform measure, to remain on the November ballot.
The ruling by the 2nd District Court of Appeals halted a Los Angeles' Superior Court judge's order Thursday to remove Proposition R from the ballot.

The decision by the three-judge panel directs the Los Angeles County Registrar — which faced a ballot-printing deadline of today — to include Proposition R on the Nov. 7 ballot.

But the appellate court also set an Oct. 3 hearing to consider the merits of the case, including whether the proposition violates the state Constitution's requirement that ballot measures only address one subject.

By that date, however, it would be too late to remove Proposition R from the sample ballot and voter information guide.

The appeals court decision marks a victory for the City Council and proponents of Proposition R — the Los Angeles Area Chamber of Commerce and League of Women Voters — which had appealed the Superior Court judge's ruling.

Opponents had argued that the measure covered two issues: allowing City Council members to run for a third, four-year term and changing a number of lobbying and campaign finance disclosure requirements.

But supporters' attorneys argued that the single-subject rule doesn't apply to this measure, and even if it did, the term limits extension and ethics reforms are part of a comprehensive reform package designed to lessen the influence of lobbyists at City Hall.

September 08, 2006 3:25 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

So now the Lightweight Brigade leisure-suits up to do "battle" with City Council again.

Forks and knives at 10 paces; praise the lord and pass the innuendo!

Glad I called in sick from my (wink, wink), "city council staffer" job to see this one go live. My "boss" the "city councilperson" who "forces" me to blog here, about how impotent the half-dozen NC loudmouths-without-mandate are, would never have let me leave my "city office desk" early, to go to "downtown" happy hours with other "city staffers" and celebrate, even on a Friday.

Wink, wink!

Sneer!

Signed,

-- And Honest-to-God elected NC boardmember working in the community, doing the outreach, and mustering up better city services.

Period!

September 08, 2006 3:34 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Let the people decide... let them vote, NCs.

What are you so afraid of??

September 08, 2006 3:37 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

LAT

Council Term Limit Measure Returns to Ballot
By Steve Hymon, Times Staff Writer
2:51 PM PDT, September 8, 2006


Although a ballot measure to relax term limits for the Los Angeles City Council still faces questions over its legality, a state appellate court today allowed the measure to be included on the Nov. 7 ballot-at least for now.

The Second District Court of Appeal also scheduled a hearing on Oct. 3 to determine whether -- as a Superior Court judge ruled Thursday -- the ballot measure violates the state constitution by combining two separate issues.

ADVERTISEMENTThe appeals court decision, while keeping the measure alive for now, also deepened the uncertainly surrounding the measure.

Proposed by two prominent civic organizations and placed on the ballot by the City Council last month, the measure asks voters to give council members, now limited to two terms, the opportunity to serve three. It also proposes several restrictions on lobbyists.

"Because the petition raises significant legal issues of great public importance, we intend to decide the petition on its merits," wrote a three-judge panel.

Even if the ballot measure is found to be illegal next month, it remains unclear what would happen next. The court could rule that votes on the item not be counted or the court could potentially delay a decision until after the election.

The court's action today also poses campaign problems for the measure's advocates. How do they stump for a measure that may be stuck down before it ever reaches voters?

Superior Court Judge Robert H. O'Brien on Thursday ruled that the measure violated the state Constitution's single-subject rule that forbids combining two unrelated items.

"We are pleased that the appellate court decided to keep the measure on the ballot and we'll defend it," said Nick Velasquez, a spokesman for City Atty. Rocky Delgadillo, who had earlier warned the council the measure might not withstand a legal challenge.

"We feel that the current measure as crafted does reach the legal standard and doesn't violate the single-subject rule," Velasquez added

September 08, 2006 3:40 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

That's exactly what the judge is going to say Oct. 3.

Let the people vote.

September 08, 2006 3:43 PM  

Anonymous Captain Jack Sparrow said:

Good Afternoon Sots!

Suiting up in leisure suits? Forks and knives at 10 paces?

Listen carefully for I shall only say this once. It is neither you nor I that control your fate. It is the voting public. And there are far more of them there are of you and I, savvy?

Choose your weapon carefully. You City Hall sots have chosen knives and forks, and have called it at 10 paces. So be it. We will see you at 10 paces, but we will not wield knives and forks. We will choose our own weapon, at our leisure. Savvy?

Just remember, you have set the pace line at 10 paces. But you have underestimated the number of feet that will mark those paces off.

NUNEZ, PADILLA, DELEON AND ROMERO WALK THE PLANK IN NOVEMBER. The rest walk in March.

September 08, 2006 3:45 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

I haven't "savvied" half the shit you spout here "shake-ur-own-spear," because you're trying too fucking hard to be clever and "thematic". . . like some C-rated restaurant with horrible food, built inside a fake pirate ship, staffed by scantily clad wenches saying "can I take your orderrrrrrr."

You can't seem to get past all that crap, round the bend to "lucid" to make that possible. . . and I got a high-Mensa-level IQ that can fathom just about anything that's not dressed up in "theme" costumes past the point of rationale debate and serious discussion.

Here's one thing we DO know from all the NC election information posted here in recent days. The LAST thing the loudmouth, under-elected "leaders" from those handful of breakaway-anyway Valley NCs REALLY want is to have to face an election where THE PEOPLE actually vote (at least not more than 100 of them in any given NC area).

That's something they've all been 99-percent failures at (not a coincidental use of numbers).
And, if you can't turn them out in white-flighty-ville suburbia to elect a board of NIMBY monitors, then you sure as shooting are dead meat in the rest of the metro.

(By the way, walk your own damn plank, if you can get a prescription to get it up). There's more to life than bumper stickers.

September 08, 2006 4:03 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Word all over the city is people are pissed by Rocky's filing. He is being hypocritical. Everyone should go to city council on Tuesday and go off on those assholes.

Everyone spread the word and support the NC's to VOTE NO on this bullshit deceiving Measure R.

September 08, 2006 4:04 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

"and I got a high-Mensa-level IQ" - If you have such a high IQ you would realize that this is not about NC's but about the manipulation and decption of voters by the City Council. The pirate has it right. You are the dumbass.

September 08, 2006 4:13 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

GEEZ, too bad you didn't think of that for the past THREE YEARS while pretending to represent us as "NC leaders" and spending city money.

"spread the word"

What a concept... OUTREACH!

"Support the NCS"

Why? The one's making all the noise DON'T REPRESENT or support their OWN communities.

That's some PRIME grade-A bullshit--- a half-dozen loudmouths, elected by 5 dozen monolithics at home, and the other 99 percent they ignore, should "support them?????"

Sure, get out the vote NOW! Maybe the "leaders" can DOUBLE their support by Novemeber and each get 200 PEOPLE out of the 40,000 at home to "support them" (don't believe it).

Prepare to insert tail between legs and try to remember where your NC area actually is.... in most cases, it's NOT bounded by Spring Street or Temple.

September 08, 2006 4:13 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

"...this is not about NC's but about the manipulation and decption of voters by the City Council."

Well, I read the League and Chamber support statements on this, and it's all very straightforward "this is now" and "this would be then" compare and contrast, just like high school essays.

And everyone else can weigh in too, up until the election and clear up any "decption".

The City council, as far as I know, hasn't issued it own reems of paper, so how is that "decption." They just facilitated a popular vote on it (that's called dem-o-cracy). It's not painful, once you get used to it.

But, where have I heard your line of logic before. . . oh yeah.

It's not about sex in the Oval Office, it's about deception and purgery

Yeah, right. The peeps didn't bite then, and they won't now, either.

What it's REALLY about is "jilted" NCs feeling like THEY should have the right to keep this from a popular vote, if THEY didn't like it, because THEY are the PEOPLE now.... you have to ask THEM, first.

Nope, don't think so, not until NCs start pulling numbers at their own elections that don't sound like the sale price of a candy bar at the Piggly Wiggly.

The promo for this one, is pretty simple, too... "Folks, these NCs that you never heard of didn't want YOU to vote on this. So much so they took it to court to keep YOU from deciding for yourself. They don't care enough about your opinion to do outreach and get you to vote for/against them, and they sure as hell don't want your unsophisticated little minds trying to wade through this "decption" (you're not "lawyers" after all, like some of the loudmouths). Average John Q is too STUPID to under stand what the legal geniuses that pretend to run their NCs can.

Let your NCs run interference to keep the "tough" decisions at bay.

September 08, 2006 4:25 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Wark the plank, SQWAK!

Wark the plank, SQWAK!

Wark the plank, SQWAK!

Wark the plank, SQWAK!

Wark the plank, SQWAK!

Wark the plank, SQWAK!

Wark the plank, SQWAK!

Wark the plank, SQWAK!

Wark the plank, SQWAK!

September 08, 2006 4:37 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Plank the Wark, SQWAK!

Plank the Wark, SQWAK

Plank the Wark, SQWAK

Plank the Wark, SQWAK

Plank the Wark, SQWAK

(Polly want a bumpersticker!)

September 08, 2006 4:40 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

You got some points there 4:03 p.m.

The 'performance art' in lieu of substantive debate can get pretty annoying here at times.

September 08, 2006 4:48 PM  

Blogger dgarzila said:

Well this is a huge victory for neighbohrood councils , huge , huge huge.

If prop R gets defeated at the polls it will not be a hollow victory and LANC will have attained so much credibility I would become the poster child for advocating for LANC.

It is important that LANC show they want to reperesent the people of LA thorugh outreach and organization and not a facade of signatures from board members of neighborhood council who are not gate keepers at all.

Hooray!!!!

Now the people have a chance to really show if the NEighbohrood council movement is for real this november.

Hooray!!!!!!

September 08, 2006 5:01 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

September 07, 2006 10:30 PM
said:
"No one in City Hall has been afraid of this blog since last year."

Are you saying they were afraid of this blog last year? Thanks for sharing. They live in a time warp on the 4th floor. They'll catch up and be nervous again, any minute now.

MS, Zuma, Walter Moore, thanks for the good work. You must be driving them nuts at City Hall, probably a short trip for some of them. "Must Attend Anger Management Classes" should come with their job descriptions.

September 08, 2006 5:23 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

They have the, you know, part of the black blood in them and part of the Latino blood in them that together makes it.

September 09, 2006 1:09 AM  

Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]

<< Home

Advertisement

Advertisement