Sandbox – 1jan15

January 2015
S	M	T	W	T	F	S
	1	2	3
4	5	6	7	8	9	10
11	12	13	14	15	16	17
18	19	20	21	22	23	24
25	26	27	28	29	30	31

OUR LINKS

YubaNet
White House Blog
Watts Up With That?
The Union
Sierra Thread
RL “Bob” Crabb
Barry Pruett Blog

Sandbox – 1jan15

01 January 2015

[Happy 2015 to one and all, may this year's discussions and debates be equally energetic and stimulating as the jousting that took place in 2014. I promise to do my part by trying to serve up as many ideological and current events hot buttons as possible. For this sandbox I throw out 'The New Wave of Graphic Novels' which are hitting the (dare I use word) 'literary scene'. Would enjoy hearing some reader opinions – especially from RL Crabb - on where this is taking us.]

Posted in Comment Sandbox

142 responses to “Sandbox – 1jan15”

Michael R. Kesti

01 January 2015

Oops, he did it again!
The award winning FUE, who has lately taken to showcasing others’ typos, posted a list of, “Local New Year predictions.” Number 5 in his list was, “George Rebane will be hired as the new general manager of KVRM radio.” Why, I wondered, might George be tapped as GM of a station in Eugene, Oregon? I then saw that Jeff had changed the call letters and that he had intended to specify “KVMR.”
I recommend that Jeff shop locally (I recommend Moule Paint and Glass.) for the materials he needs to repair the stone-thrown damage he has done to his glass house.

LikeLike
Bill the Tozer

01 January 2015

Happy New Year to all and especially Dr. Rebane, To honor our fearless blogger and man of common sense, I will spend this day getting down to Rebane de Punta.
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=_cF5ZGh9RUA

LikeLike
RL Crabb

01 January 2015

Graphic novels? Graphic novels are by no means a new phenomenon. My first encounter with the artform was Will Eisner’s “A Contract With God”, a semi-autobiographical account of immigrant life in the New York City of the 1930s. A few years later, Art Spiegalman received the Pulitzer Prize for “Maus”, his retelling of his father’s experiences as a Polish Jew and Holocaust survivor. (The Jews were portrayed as mice. The German’s were cats.)
The recent trend in auto-bio novels is aimed more toward the female perspective. Although I’ve never read the book, I saw the film version of Marjane Satrapi’s “Persepolis”, her tale of growing up in revolutionary Iran. The film was initially banned in Iran and other muslim countries, but the public demanded otherwise and the film was shown, after the scenes depicting her sexual encounters were edited out.
Many of these illustrated stories are autobiographical, including my own “Scablands.” It was tempting to embellish the story or use my experiences in a fictional setting, but I chose to tell it the way it happened, warts and all.
Reactions have been mixed, especially here in Nevada County where most people know me from the Village Idiot comics. Scablands is a dark tale, recounting the year when I had to decide whether to live fast, die young, and leave a good looking corpse, or to clean up my act and settle down. Well, I’m still here and there’s no chance of me looking good in a coffin now. Ha.

LikeLike
Bill the Tozer

01 January 2015

Mr. Crabb; perhaps if you find a real ugly primitive coffin, you might look good by comparison. 🙂
Walt, A good New Year to you and the little angels with horns. The year in review:
http://dailycaller.com/2014/12/31/the-seven-biggest-liberal-fails-of-2014/

LikeLike
Russ Steele

01 January 2015

My intro to graphic novels was the magazine rack at large book stores in the late 1990s, as I recall they were quite pornographic in nature. Most had plastic covers like Playboy and Penthouse so that readers could not take a look before buying, or just browse. They were often located on the rack near to the geek books on computers, programing and graphic arts.

LikeLike
RL Crabb

01 January 2015

Graphic novels come in all genres. The movie “Watchmen” was a graphic novel by Alan Moore, who also wrote “V for Vendetta.” (All those Guy Fawkes masks you see at Occupy rallies are lifted from the artwork.) The Dark Knight (Batman) movies were based on the graphic novel of the same name by Frank Miller. “300”, also based on a graphic novel by Miller.
Underground legend R. Crumb illustrated the Book of Genesis in a graphic novel form. There are a number of educational graphic novels. And yes, there are x-rated very graphic novels, especially some of the Japanese anime variety.

LikeLike
George Rebane

01 January 2015

Back in the old days when we regularly read comic books (as a refugee kid I learned to read English very quickly from comic books), the ‘serious stuff’ came to us through Classic Comics which featured abbreviated versions of all kinds of well-known books, myths, historical episodes, etc. Could those be called graphic novels today? If not, is it correct to assume that Classic Comics somehow figured into the ancestry of graphic novels – in short, how do the two relate?

LikeLike
Walt

01 January 2015

Nothing better on the subject than MAD MAG..
Thanks Bill,, It’s always a pleasure to see the young’ns show up. When they (he) are 2.5 years old,, Only the dog is sad to see them go. ( always a great food source)
The cats are still in hiding. It seems they care to keep their tails attached.
As for R. Crumb,, he sure hit drew the hippies in all their glory.

LikeLike
Todd Juvinall

01 January 2015

I liked the graphic nature of Popular Mechanics.

LikeLike
Russ Steele

01 January 2015

Change of subject. Did anyone see Amy Goodman’s Column in the New Years Union. I have posted some thought on it here: http://sierrafoothillcommentary.com

LikeLike
Joe Smith

01 January 2015

Our own Mr. “shop local” seen in Roseville occupying well over half an aisle. It was both novel and graphic. LOL, the internet is changing the way we bust hypocrites.Can’t make this stuff up.

LikeLike
George Rebane

02 January 2015

Since moving north we have for a number of reasons weaned ourselves from watching the Rose Parade – it has changed so much over the years. Surfing channels during breakfast yesterday we caught a brief segment that included a very large marching band in white uniforms and arrayed in a big formation that spelled out ‘We love Mexico’. Who were the marchers, what was the purpose of their message in that particular parade, and why did the Rose Parade committee accept their application to be included?
I wonder if any parade in Mexico would countenance a marching unit of, say, prospective illegal aliens spelling out ‘We love the United States’. Hmmm…

LikeLike
Todd Juvinall

02 January 2015

I thought the band doing “Dixie” was a hoot! The PC crowd was probably apoplectic!

LikeLike
Russ Steele

02 January 2015

George@08:54AM
We backed up the DVR as we missed who was the sponsor. The band was sponsored by the country of Mexico. Still a little over the top for the Rose Parade.

LikeLike
Steven Frisch

02 January 2015

Does anyone else find it ironic that while in one post on Mr. Rebane’s blog he decries the “hecklers veto” as an imposition on free speech, in another post he would state, “Who were the marchers, what was the purpose of their message in that particular parade, and why did the Rose Parade committee accept their application to be included?”
Is speech free? Or do we each place a preferred filter on what we would consider free speech? And isn’t our guarantee of free speech a guarantee against government intrusion in speech, not the individuals right to object to the content of another’s speech?

LikeLike
fish

02 January 2015

Posted by: Steven Frisch | 02 January 2015 at 09:19 AM
Not really! No attempt was made to impede their performance. Questioning motivation and message after the fact is merely politics.

LikeLike
Todd Juvinall

02 January 2015

Does our free speech laws apply to Mexico Mr. Frisch?

LikeLike
George Rebane

02 January 2015

Re StevenF’s 919am – We again point out the workings of the liberal mind in not being able to parse the definition of ‘heckler’s veto’ and equating even asking questions about someone else’s speech with impeding or outright censoring it as was pointed out here in Mr fish’s 932am.
This chronic confusion in the liberal mind was highlighted in the update to my ‘Heckler’s Veto’ piece –
http://rebaneruminations.typepad.com/rebanes_ruminations/2014/12/happy-hecklers-veto-for-2015.html
As we have confessed over the years, we see no remedy for this defect, and can only hope for reliably recognizing its product.

LikeLike
Walt

02 January 2015

This should be of internist to the MJ gang.. Remember when they tried to play the ” look at the taxes that can be raised if it were legalized”..? Even the tax loving LIBS find ways NOT to pay those taxes.
http://news.yahoo.com/medical-marijuana-challenge-legal-pot-states-052859824–finance.html
Those who had an ounce of smarts would know full well that taxing something that can be grown by just about anyone is a fool’s errand. Or pay a few bucks to a (ha) Dr. for a “prescription” for some dubious ailment.

LikeLike
Steven Frisch

02 January 2015

So lets see, Todd does not know Pasadena is in the United States; Fish can’t recognize that an ex post facto questioning of the content of the Rose Parade is a is a de facto ‘heckler’s veto’ by setting the stage for next years event; and George continues to dissemble about the very definition while exhibiting the very tendency to want to restrict that he decries in liberal.
Stupid, disingenuous and hypocritical. New year, same old bullshit.

LikeLike
fish

02 January 2015

Fish can’t recognize that an ex post facto questioning of the content of the Rose Parade is a is a de facto ‘heckler’s veto’ by setting the stage for next years event…..
Starting 2015 with reading comprehension issues I see!
The “Hecklers Veto” has to actually attempt to prevent the act/presentation from occurring not simply comment on it Steve. Get back to us in 2016 and we’ll see if you’re right.
Stupid, disingenuous and hypocritical. New year, same old bullshit.
Yes! Much like you jerking jeffy off over “nuanced scheduling” of political talks at Western Gateway Park!
Predictable and hypocritical indeed!

LikeLike
George Rebane

02 January 2015

re StevenF’s 1109am and fish’s 1121am – As is his wont, Steven Frisch returns to lambast me and other RR readers who don’t agree with his views and interpretations. We will end this mudball fest before it gains momentum by reciprocating his parting remarks as “Stupid, disingenuous and hypocritical. New year, same old bullshit.”

LikeLike
Michael R. Kesti

02 January 2015

Todd Juvinall 02Jan15 09:42 AM
Our “free speech laws” amount to the first amendment to the Constitution of the United States. The right to free speech is not granted by that amendment. Instead, the amendment prohibits government from infringing on that (and other) right(s).
The Rose Parade is produced by a non-profit organization known as the “Pasadena Tournament of Roses Association” (PTRA). They are not an agency of government nor are they funded by government. The PTRA therefore has the exclusive prerogative to decide the content of their events. Our “free speech laws” are irrelevant to their decision.
That said, I feel the inclusion of a band sponsored by the Mexican government that marched in a formation that spelled out “We love Mexico” was inappropriate and in poor taste. It seems, though, that all I can do about it is to continue my life-long boycott the PTRA’s events.

LikeLike
fish

02 January 2015

Posted by: Michael R. Kesti | 02 January 2015 at 11:32 AM
Why anyone cares about who marches in a parade is beyond me. I would expect a band from Mexico and sponsored by the Mexican government to be a little favorable to Mexico.
That said, the assertion that those who might care about the motivations behind the entry and who choose to discuss it now are somehow exercising a future “Hecklers Veto” is absurd. The individual making the claim should be called out on his “disingenuous and hypocritical” idiocy!

LikeLike
Walt

02 January 2015

Funny.. Steve pipes up about what is said here, when he himself is a VETOer of one’s opinion on his own rag of a blog. What a joke.. How many times has he bitched about un-moderated speech?
On that note, we all have the “right” to say as we please. That doesn’t mean everyone has to hear or listen to what you say. We all have the right to walk away, or change the channel. Like with LIB news for instance. Thank the Lord we are not forced to the likes of CNN or MSNBC. The masses have VETOED them. Not by censorship, or drowning them out will yelling and screaming, or damaging their hardware. They chose just not to listen. That’s what happens when “your message” is full of lies, or cry “wolf” way too many times.

LikeLike
George Rebane

02 January 2015

To clarify and amplify, my 854am was intended to illuminate the extremely asymmetrical relationship that America has with Mexico, and Americans with Mexicans (especially the millions of Mexicans living here illegally).

LikeLike
Todd Juvinall

02 January 2015

Kesti, I do understand the difference. My question is does Mexico have free speech rights in our country. I say no but apparently they were extended those rights by a non profit.
Frisch of course comes here and does his best to show all his nastiness and ignorance as a liberal grant seeker of taxpayers money. I am hopeful our new Congress will delve into the giveaway of our money in the form of grants and loans to organizations like Sierra Business Council. They are a tremendous waste of our precious dollars. We also see the attitudes of their leaders such as theFrisch and his disdain for those that supply his manna. No wonder our country is in such trouble with liberals like theFrisch spewing their hate and nastiness. But I guess tax cheats have more intelligence than others.

LikeLike
Todd Juvinall

02 January 2015

Paul Emery, yes, the sources you use are not actual Limbaugh quotes but those made up by Media Matters and other leftwing sources. Limbaugh uses humor and hyperbole to make a point and you have as usual, fallen for the lefty demagogues BS. But keep trying.

LikeLike
Michael R. Kesti

02 January 2015

Todd Juvinall 02Jan15 12:35 PM
Mexicans do indeed have free speech rights in the United States. The first amendment doesn’t specify that only U.S. citizens are protected. What is more, the Declaration of Independence says that the source of rights is the Creator, not only the Creator of U.S. citizens. Like it or not, the constitution protects the rights of all people within the jurisdiction of the United States.
This is, by the way, the justification for holding prisoners at the Guantanamo Bay Naval Base and not trying them in U.S. courts. Those prisoners’ rights are not protected as long as they remain outside of the United States.
Your passive-aggressive reference to me using my surname without the corresponding honorific is not lost on me, Todd, and serves to further demonstrate your lack of class.

LikeLike
Michael R. Kesti

02 January 2015

Todd Juvinall 02Jan15 12:35 PM
Mexicans (and all other nations’ citizens) most certainly do have free speech (and all of the other) rights while in the United States. The Declaration of Independence does not state that the Creator endows rights only to U.S. citizens and our constitution does not limit the prohibition against infringement to U.S. citizens.
This is, by the way, the justification for holding terrorist suspects at the Guantanamo Bay Naval Base. If they were incarcerated within the U.S. then their rights could not be legally infringed.
Your passive-aggressive use of my surname without the corresponding honorific is not lost on me, Todd, and serves to further support my opinion concerning your lack of class.

LikeLike
Walt

02 January 2015

Hummm Try saying anything you damned well please outside the boarders of this land and see what happens. Even in Canada. ( let alone Mexico OR the Middle East)
Ann Coulter sure got in trouble in Canada for “speaking” her opinion.

LikeLike
Todd Juvinall

02 January 2015

Kesti, it appears you are very tightly wound man. Maybe you need to take a drink and loosen up. My “class” is just fine, it appears yours is missing.
Oh, and thanks for tha “constitutional” lesson. LOL!

LikeLike
Steven Frisch

02 January 2015

I was merely commenting on the hypocrisy of George questioning the veracity of having a “Mexican” float in the Rose parade whilst simultaneously decrying others trying to squelch free speech. If you don’t see the inconsistency in that then I really can’t help you. Just another example of how out of touch with reality the posters here are on a regular basis.

LikeLike
Michael R. Kesti

02 January 2015

Todd Juvinall 02Jan15 03:22 PM
You’re welcome. I believe that we must understand our rights if they are to be retained and I am pleased to have provided a small measure of the help that you so clearly need.

LikeLike
Todd Juvinall

02 January 2015

Kesti, thanks, I’ll put your advice/information in the proper folder. If I can be of any further assistance let me know.

LikeLike
George Rebane

02 January 2015

StevenF 350pm – So noted. However, your use of “veracity” is more than a bit puzzling. No one questioned the veracity of anything that I’m aware of save your attempts to connect the unconnectable. Another confirmation of our being past the tipping point in the national debate.

LikeLike
Walt

02 January 2015

Excuse one proud Dad here. My eldest Daughter took third in the women’s dev.
in the New years run! She has become quite the athlete of the family.

LikeLike
Todd Juvinall

02 January 2015

Congrats Walt! Ask Steve Frisch if we can celebrate or je may think we are misogamists. LOL!

LikeLike
Walt

02 January 2015

OH,,, that’s right… LIBS hate winners and good ol’ competition. Someones feelings will be hurt.
In the grand scope of things LIBS want everyone to be equally miserable. ( and are off to a good start)

LikeLike
fish

03 January 2015

I was merely commenting on the hypocrisy of George questioning the veracity of having a “Mexican” float in the Rose parade whilst simultaneously decrying others trying to squelch free speech. If you don’t see the inconsistency in that then I really can’t help you. Just another example of how out of touch with reality the posters here are on a regular basis.
Dance monkey…..Dance!

LikeLike
fish

03 January 2015

I went back and reread the “Western Gateway Park Fiasco” thread and you’re right Steve it really was all about good proactive governance.
Steve,
We’re in agreement that the goal isn’t to “trump free speech.” The goal is to “manage” it (wink, wink, nudge, nudge): just like all parks do. No other park in our county that I know of has become such a venue for political activism, so the Western Gateway Park board has a duty to address it — not blame the messenger.
Third day of 2015 and Frisch is out of the blocks like a sprinter!
(Quotes and snotty comment in parenthesis mine alone….for the purpose of clarification)

LikeLike
Barry Pruett

03 January 2015

Pelline wanted the board to “manage” (aka censor) political speech at Gateway. Sounds like North Korea. To his credit, don’t pin that on Steve; it was not his idea.

LikeLike
fish

03 January 2015

You’re right Barry it wasn’t his idea. I point it out because he and jeffy seemed to think that potentially throwing up scheduling hurdles at Western Gateway was a perfectly acceptable practice.
Contrast that position with yesterdays offering:
So lets see, Todd does not know Pasadena is in the United States; Fish can’t recognize that an ex post facto questioning of the content of the Rose Parade is a is a de facto ‘heckler’s veto’ by setting the stage for next years event; and George continues to dissemble about the very definition while exhibiting the very tendency to want to restrict that he decries in liberal.
Stupid, disingenuous and hypocritical. New year, same old bullshit.
Merely discussing content is censorship in Steve’s world whereas potentially restricting access to a venue where positions you’d prefer not to hear is just good governance!

LikeLike
Barry Pruett

03 January 2015

You made my follow up point for me as to discussing content versus censoring it. To be clear, Pelline did not simply want scheduling hurdles to free speech. He wanted it regulate based upon content (ie regulating speech that is political) which is blatantly unconstitutional.

LikeLike
Russ Steele

03 January 2015

Jeffie is promoting the Tea Party’s Agenda 21 Speaker. While it is most negative, he is helping get the word out to the un-committed lurkers on his liberal propaganda machine.
http://sierrafoothillsreport.com/2015/01/03/local-tea-party-rings-in-new-year-with-hard-right-crusader-who-got-trounced-in-bay-area-congressional-race/

LikeLike
fish

03 January 2015

You made my follow up point for me as to discussing content versus censoring it.
Perhaps Barry but this is directed at Steve who loves to portray himself as an ardent defender of first amendment rights. He and Pelline thought that a “balance” of the rights of park goers would be better served by having people “think deeply” about content.
From July of last year:
jeffpelline says:
July 12, 2014 at 6:49 am
Barry,
There’s no need to strike an insulting tone in your appointed role as a Western Gateway Park director. As someone who is politically active yourself, you should know the law: Parks cannot regulate the content of the speech, but they can regulate the time, manner and place in which the speech is delivered. Here’s the National Parks’ policy: http://www.nps.gov/dewa/planyourvisit/first-amendment.htm
Western Gateway Park’s mission is supposed to be “filled with fun for individuals, families and groups.” For whatever reason, the park is hosting more events from political activists, so perhaps the board ought to think more deeply about its policy for handing this. I know of no other park in the county, or region, where this is occurring with any regularity: Pioneer Park, Condon Park, Truckee River Regional Park, just to name a few.
Frisch thought Pellines suggestion was perfectly acceptable……read examine the political perspective of someone wanting to lease the venue before granting a permit. If you recall jeffy was unwilling (or more likely unable) to show how his park experience had been harmed by the presence of a Tea Party/SOJ get together or demonstrate how the rally was in violation of the parks charter.
Yesterday Frisch thought that Georges discussion of the “We Love Mexico” float was somehow an example of the “Hecklers Veto” and an attempt at future censorship.
I found it an interesting example of yet more cognitive dissonance from Steve.

LikeLike
Steven Frisch

03 January 2015

Fish, I think you missed the point I was making, it was the hypocrisy of George implying it was inappropriate on some level to have a “Mexican” plot in the parade while protesting the hecklers veto on another thread.
I never stated that it was inappropriate, or that the Rose Parade management did not have a right to regulate who appears in their event, nor did I even attempt to address those issues. I was agnostic on them in my post.
The issue is exacerbated by the fact that the Rose Parade takes place on public streets, which might affect their private ability to regulate content.
But I stand by my contention that in cases where there are competing uses in public spaces it is perfectly appropriate to regulate those uses to avoid possible conflict. That is standard operating procedure in most jurisdictions, as it should be in a park. We don’t issue simultaneous marching permits for the KKK and the Revolutionary Communist Party of America on the same street at the same time because we don’t want a riot. That does not mean we deny the KKK or the RCPA a permit, they should be able to march. We regulate the time and the place. It merely means we establish protocols to avoid violence.
Barry you know as well as I do that regulating the place and time of speech is not unconstitutional, regulating the content of speech is. No one suggested regulating content.
Talk about cognitive dissonance, Fish you constructed an entire straw man argument to reply to.

LikeLike
Steven Frisch

03 January 2015

“Dance monkey, dance”–Fish
Talk about a wasted life. Don’t you have anything better to do Fish? Don’t you have a life or family, or interests other than sitting in front of your computer monitoring stupid web sites for hours so you can the the first monkey to reply? It never ceases to amaze me that on the rare occasions I do come back to this cesspool, the fastest reply comment, reliably within about 20 minutes of a post going on any site, is you.
My recommendation is that you go out for a walk in the park, or read a good book ,or love your wife, or see a play, or build a boat, or do something to clear your mind every once in a while. It seems to clogged with crap.

LikeLike
George Rebane

03 January 2015

Administrivia – given his 938am, we have again relieved Steven Frisch from having to “come back to this cesspool”. Try as I might to harbor hope, that man has neither the intellect nor upbringing to match the deportment of the other liberal commenters who contribute to the debates on these pages. But not to worry, he and his ilk have many outlets for airing their sorry nostrums for humanity.

LikeLike
Barry Pruett

03 January 2015

“Barry you know as well as I do that regulating the place and time of speech is not unconstitutional, regulating the content of speech is. No one suggested regulating content.” The first part of your statement is true and the second part is false. That is not what I said…this is a public park that we are discussing. “Hague v. CIO (1939), considers an ordinance which gave a city official the discretion to decide whether an organization seeking to hold a meeting in public spaces in the city would be allowed to do so. Whenever the official concluded that the meeting posed a risk of disturbances, he could reject the request. The Supreme Court ruled the law void on its face. The Court said, ‘Streets and parks…have immemoriably been held in trust for the use of the public and, time out of mind, have been used for purposes of assembly, communicating thoughts between citizens, and discussing public issues. Such use has, from ancient times, been part of the privileges, immunities, and liberties of citizens.’ Some justices concluded that the law violated the Fourteenth Amendment’s privileges and immunities clause, while Justice Stone argued that law violated the First Amendment, as incorporated.’” This is where our local ultra-liberal leader (Pelline) has run a fowl of the Constitution.

LikeLike