Santa Barbara Politics, Media & Culture

Tuesday, November 20, 2007

Moral Turpitude, Photos and Copyright Issues

A picture may be worth a thousand words but two court losses in one week means that The Independent is showing they have some mettle in refusing to turn over more than 300 photos from the day Luis Linares was killed behind Sak's Fifth Avenue in what was egregiously called a "gang melee" by the News-Press.

Judge Brian Hill ordered that the photos be turned over this past Monday by a November 28th deadline or allow photographer Paul Wellman to be faced with contempt of court charges. Well-known local constitutional attorney Michael Cooney is representing Wellman and The Santa Barbara Independent.

Also important on the front page of their web site is a story that was not entirely told by the News-Press about a copyright infringement case they had against The Independent. I, myself, read the headlines on the News-Press from a newspaper stand. Checking my pockets and considering my mores, 25 cents wasn't enough and I figured I'd catch the story later...kudos to The Independent for covering both stories so well.

From Matt Kettman's story in The Independent:

It’s interesting to see what the News-Press picked and chose to write about,” said Randy Campbell, The Independent’s publisher. “There were five different claims and the article mentioned one of them. And that one’s going to trial — the story made it seem like it was a done deal. It left out the other four claims, one of which is hanging on by a thread to go to trial, and the other three were dismissed by the judge.”

I am sure our friends that seem in such adamant support of the News-Press of late can explain why the whole story wasn't explained in the News-Press today....can they? I say that there is more bias in the newsroom now than ever was alleged before -- but perhaps one of you can defend their actions as defense against moral turpitude.

I looked back to see what we were talking about back then. We published Wendy's response in toto but somehow failed to link to Scott Hadly's piece in question that ran on The Independent's web site.

The News-Press' effort to get Nick Welsh to divulge sources is contrary to a bias-free newsroom.

What about the public good? Do we have a right to know? Perhaps more importantly, why should Nick Welsh reveal his sources? Why would anyone give him background or off-the-record comments ever again if Wendy and Arthur can get a hold of the sources screen name by simply spending the same they spend for a few tanks of gas for the Calixe to cross the pond?

Labels: ,


Anonymous Anonymous said...

So the Indy is showing its mettle by not handing over the photos, and the Sound was belittled here for doing the same thing some months ago. And the difference is???

11/21/2007 5:52 AM  
Anonymous The Shadow Knows said...

The News Press article was accurate in as far as it went, but was incomplete, therefore misleading, and was clearly biased in not reporting the fact that the Independent also prevailed. Will Scott Steepleton fire himself for biased reporting? Who knows what evil lurks in the heart of man? The Shadow knows!

11/21/2007 6:06 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Come Wendy supporters: those of us with morals and principals are still waiting for you to provide one - just one - instance of biased reporting from the former reporters. Just one.

I will not let you get the last word on this, no matter how many times we cover the topic on this blog. I have friends whose reputations are being unjustifiably soiled by these mountebanks and her greedy admirers.

11/21/2007 6:49 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

How can Wendy McCaw reconcile her Orwellian statements that she insists on a newspaper "without bias" against publishing a story about a business competitor, leaving out its side completely?

Isn't getting a quote from even a competitor basic fair Journalism 101? Note it's written by the "Associate Editor" in Chief who doesn't even live here, who has to do the dirty work and appears to have no shame.

It's worse than "anti-coyote," it's a clear breach of the wall between news and business.

Is it mystifying why readers are dropping the once "newspaper of record."

11/21/2007 7:53 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Don't let yourself be misled by the misleading comments dissing the NewsPress reporting. The news was they won, and it doesn't matter what also got thrown out.

It is typical for any lawyer who charges by the hour to throw up every possible charge that has come nexus to the set of facts being litigated to see which one sticks.

There is little real investment is most of the accessory charges included in a typical legal complaint. They are just a laundry list added for insurance purposes. So anyone telling you the NewsPress "lost" several of the charges filed is just manipulating you again with their own anti-NewsPress bias.

And since too many still don't want to give up their irrational hatred of the NewsPress, they will continue to let themselves get led around by the nose in their sense of moral superiority, while showing how legally naive they are.

Give it all a rest, and prepare for the next legal round which most likely will norquire the NewsPress to reinstate the fired reporters either.

The Independent copyright defense case was a total waste of time. This was no fair-use case from the outset and only served to harass and delay the obvious. Their legal defense was an abuse of the system. And no moral kudos protecting the crime scene photos either.

If the Independent thinks they are standing for journalistic principles, they need to think again. They are standing for pettiness and spite and are wasting too much money in the process that would be better spent on reporters salaries so they can continue their nice niche as an independent journalistic voice in this town and take the time to do the in depth local stories sorely missed by the new NewsPress.

11/21/2007 8:51 AM  
Anonymous sa1 said...

So what exactly is the point of asking for the photos? Is there some exculpating evidence in them? Is the accused defense to be that he was misidentified? Weren't these photos taken well after the fact?

What's next, is the defence attorney going to demand that Tom Sneddon prosecute the case so as to give the defendent the best chance of beating the rap?

11/21/2007 9:02 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Pleae sue the independent for $10,000,000 for their copyright infringement.
bleed em on attorneys fees.
It would sure be nice to get rid of that socialist rag.

11/21/2007 10:39 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...


Just besause nobody is wasting their time providing you with one biased story does not mean that there are none.

It's obvious to most readers that many stories were somewhat biased.
The fact is that thewre is not one newspaper in the country that does not have some bias creep into a story once in a while. It's normal and it's human nature. So for you to to imply that there is zero bias by the former reportersis patently absurd. they are human are they not. All humans are biased. It's normal. So accept it and get over it.
Nobody said they were grossly biased just that they were occasionally somewhat biased. O.K.?

11/21/2007 10:45 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

News Press haters are STILL missing the point here.
It does not matter if Wendy doesn't have any friends, or if people don't respect her, or if it costing her a lot of money. or even if the news Press is not doing well financially.
It does not matter if it is a hollow victory for her.

All that matters is that 20 years from now the News Press will still be our daily paper and that it will still be owned by Wendy and she will still be runing it the way she wants, which will be the same way she is running it now.

And you are impotent to change this reality!

The point is that the real losers here will be those handfull of folks that have built up such hatred for the news press that this hatred will begin to consume them and change their mental health and their physical health. Their personalities will slowly but surely change for the worse.

Is that what you want to do to yourself by hanging on to this emotion of hatred?

11/21/2007 10:50 AM  
Anonymous Don Jose de la Guerra y Noreiga said...

I read the judge's ruling in the PDF posted on the Independent site. I am ruminating on the sad fact I learned (I am not a journalist)that even though Scott Hadley wrote the story, and the Newspress refused to publish it, Scott Hadley does not get to have the copyright revert to him even if he leaves the company. It would seem that in journalism, one could write and work like crazy, but if the Newspaper chooses to NOT publish your work, your effort falls down the deep sinkhole of eternal oblivion. In other words, journalists have only the simple protections of work for hire laws and none of the usual protections of authors. They are just wage slaves.

Maybe I'm wrong. So I pose a question. Do University Professors own their copyright, say for example if they write a work of history? Or does the University own it? Who gets the royalties in the Humanities, the true author or the University? Does this hold true in the sciences?

Poor Scott Hadley...not even master of his own wordsmithing even if his Master doesn't want to publish it!

11/21/2007 11:08 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Seems like an appropriate judgment would be to fine the Independent $.01 and have them promise never to do it again, in view of the difficulty of the N-P's ever proving any damages and their stated purpose of the suit being to punish the Independent.

11/21/2007 11:54 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

When has the new News Press written honestly about itself since the meltdown? Why should this story be any different? Every story the NP has written regarding the law suits and NLRB actions has left out important facts regarding the cases when those facts go against the NP. It amazes me that people could support and trust an organization that is purposely dishonest regarding it's own news. What makes you think that they are more honest when reporting local news?

11/21/2007 12:31 PM  
Anonymous sa1 said...

Boy, one look at that photo of Atkins in the DS and you can understand why Hill caved.

I hope for his sake that legal beagle has her shots up to date...

11/21/2007 12:32 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Too many wanna-be legal beagles in all these blogs spewing comments that would be thrown out of any court.

This particular one promises to bring out the worst of the bunch pontificating like Perry Mason.

I suggest you obtain certified copies of the court transcripts and read it rather than challenging lay people to type their proof in such limited space.
Better yet, go take a few law courses and learn how to argue a point with intelligence.

11/21/2007 12:55 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Sara: You either don't know what "egregious" means, or you don't know what "melee" means. Which is it?

Also, I'm pretty sure every media outlet on the south coast called that incident a melee, which is an accurate description, so why the jab at the News-Press?

I totally understand calling the NP on their many mishaps, but this wasn't one of them, so, in my opinion, it just makes you look ignorant. You know the old saying: Those who live in a glass house ...

Thanks for listening.

Oh, just an FYI:

e·gre·gious –adjective
1. extraordinary in some bad way; glaring; flagrant: an egregious mistake; an egregious liar.

me·lee –noun
1. a confused hand-to-hand fight or struggle among several people.

11/21/2007 3:35 PM  
Blogger Sara De la Guerra said...

Good catch -- I was referring more to their glaring ability to call it a melee in front of Sak's but a gang fight anywhere on the East or Westside.

5:52 AM yesterday -- I don't remember opposing The Sound's right to keep the photos to themselves. Please see

11/21/2007 5:17 PM  
Blogger Sara De la Guerra said...

Let's try:
Prior post

11/21/2007 5:18 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

All that matters is that 20 years from now the News Press will still be our daily paper and that it will still be owned by Wendy and she will still be runing it the way she wants, which will be the same way she is running it now.

And it will continue to be an embarrassment to journalism, and no self-respecting reporter with the slightest bit of integrity will work there.

It'll be the most popular local paper with the dozen or so brainless twits who support her.

What I triumph!

11/21/2007 5:54 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

6;49 a.m.

you used the term "Greedy admirers"

Why would you categorize all those 1000's who like the new press and/or admire Wendy as 'GREEDY'?

I just don't get it? Where is the greed in admiring sonething or someone. Where is the greed in speaking ones opinion. Where is the financial motivation or advantage? there is none.

Your use of this term shows your ignorance, and shows your blatent hatred. Now your attacking the admirers? for what --speaking their honest opinion.

Do you not believe in allowing others to have an honest opinion that is different from yours. Do you respect them and their opinion even thoiugh different from yours?

Just who is the gerntleperson with class here and who is the angry and hateful person with no class.
Get a life!

I suggest that you think for a moment about how YOU are acting. I feel sorry for your significant other for having to put up with the likes of you.

11/21/2007 6:54 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

If Wendy McCaw owns the paper and is running it the way she wants 20 years from now, at the present rate of circulation decline, 20 percent or so a year, she will have very few readers and will have lost a true fortune.

11/21/2007 6:59 PM  
Blogger Sara De la Guerra said...

6:54 pm -- OUCH! Dude! Do we have to get into our spousal relationships...

Pull back a bit please!

11/21/2007 7:54 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I found it interesting that the Judge used the Daily Nexus example to rule against fair use by the Indy.

The Nexus had the article by Hadly too but didn't publish it verbatim, they just described it. That was OK. The Indy could have printed a nearly verbatim summary and gotten by with fair use. is way, way better than the News-Press. I pretty much only look at the News-Press now when a found copy comes my way, about once every two weeks.

I don't hate the News-Press, but it is simply irrelevant. The only things I hate are that they occupy such a great bit of real estate in the center of town and their suit and behavior with respect to Roberts.

11/21/2007 9:47 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

The good thing about the Meltdown is the Indy is now so fat it can afford to fight the good fight against revealing its sources.

11/21/2007 10:41 PM  
Blogger Bill Carson said...

"Why should Nick Welsh reveal his sources?"

Since when do fiction writers get to claim journalistic protection under the First Amendment? The Indy is a comic book that is looked upon as a real newspaper by a small, narrow-minded group of misguided individuals.

11/21/2007 11:25 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I can't argue with you about my significant other, but I can tell you McCaw's admirers are greedy because they hold the property rights of the individual high above all else, and that stance is squarely rooted in greed. I dare you to argue otherwise and not paint an unflattering self portrait.

Anon 10:50AM -

Since you're too lazy to type new posts rather than cut and paste an old one, I'll repeat my retort - staying active in defense of information and workers rights will never get old, my friend, and will not eat away at the informed and disciplined minds of us who believe taking care of your fellow man trumps greed - we'll even believe this 20 years from now - and better yet: the golden rule will out live the NP, you, me, McCaw, and even the riches she acquired through her divorce lawyers.

11/22/2007 12:18 PM  
Anonymous an american and proud of it said...

10;50 a.m and 12;18 p.m ( obviously the same person)

1. forgive me for mentioning your significant other--that was a low blow and was only a result of my frustration with you. sorry.

2. regarding greed--thanks for responding to my question---now i get it. I had thought that you were implying that somehow liking the News press automatically made one greedy. I had never thought od myself as greedy before.

But now I finally get your point. You are basicaly talking about basic politics and the difference between socialists/progressives like yourself and otheres in your camp and conservatives/moderates like myself and others in my camp.

Even though I don't agree with your position I respect your right to having your position. it's o.k. for us to disagree---that's part of democracy. Our country is pretty much divided 50% -50% into republicans and democrats. It is a fact that republicans and many democrats making up a majority of the citizens in our country believe in private property rights. It's the basis of our fine country and our free enterprise system is directly responsible for creating our having the highest standard of living in the world. If socialism, that you believe in, were so great then Russia would be a great place to move to and live.

What you are saying is that the majority of citizens our country are excessively greedy and that our free enterprise system is bad because americans have a high standard of living which provides them with private property. I think you are simply wrong about this. You have our basic form of government, our free enterprise system, and our freedom and our property rights wrongly equated with greed. It is not greed but a desire for our citizens to have freedom, a high standard of living, and a system with incentives for one to start a busingess to provide jobs for others. This is something wonderful and not evil greed.

Your position is so left wing radical that It's hard to take it seriously even though i respect your right to have your opinion. But you are just plain wrong in your faulty thinking my friend.

11/23/2007 7:16 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

7:16--what surprises me is that suddenly in Santa Barbara anyone who has managed to purchase a home in Santa Barbara is automatically assumed to be greedy. Anyone who works long and hard to maintain a quality of life in the neighborhood is assumed to be a greedy enemy of the people. Anyone who works to uphold the traditions of this community is considered an irrelevant, greedy enemy of the people. This is not the typical thinking throughout America, but somehow this SB crowd validates its position by trying to tear down good, hard-working, decent folks. This is not progressive thinking; it's intolerant propaganda.

11/23/2007 9:12 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Nobody is putting down the small percentage of people who make enough money that they can save enough to put down on a piece of SB real estate, and then be able to afford the payments. That is great for those in the very small minority that can do it. You are not middle class, you are upper middle class to upper class. What upsets the real middle class is the arrogant disdain you have for anybody who can't accomplish the same goal no matter how hard they work and scrimp because they don't make enough money to accomplish that. That includes most of the people who actually live and work in SB but your type are oblivious to that and treat those people like trash. The attitude is that so what, they don't have to live here. What you don't realize is that if they leave, much of the heart of the community leaves. Sure they can be replaced by other short timers but ultimately what does that do to the integrity and stability of the community.
Even communities that do not have grossly inflated real estate markets encourage developments that are affordable and keep workers in the community and preferrably downtown. What is wrong with encouraging a vibrant downtown by building apartments and studios that are attractive, functional and affordable? Many other cities are doing exactly that with really positive returns on their investmens.

11/23/2007 4:34 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

9:12AM writes: "...somehow this SB crowd validates its position by trying to tear down good, hard-working, decent folks."

Do you mean like the former employees of the NewsPress?

11/23/2007 6:23 PM  
Blogger John Quimby said...

Hey Bill Carson,

Opinions are fine.
I have mine and you have yours.

But let's not let emotion overwrite facts.

The Independent is now a very well funded comic book with a lot of local advertisers and readers who represent a healthy Return on Investment.

Ms. McCaw is legally entitled to do as she pleases and to use due process to her advantage if she can.

So too with the Indy.

Don't like it? Call your Congresswoman.

In the end my opinion won't count.
You and I will have to wait for the court to decide.

Sucks, don't it?

11/23/2007 8:34 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I scrimped and saved, have a low-collar job, own a house in an undesirable part of town and no one puts me down. Get over your unfounded class envy.

11/23/2007 9:17 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...


We own a nice home here. So What? We will not feel guilty about those who cannot now, nor ever will own a home in SB. The more the whining the more disgusted we get even being here to hear and read the same old sad song. Outsiders ruined this once beautiful place and they should all go back to where they came from.

We would like to own a nice home in Bel Air section of Beverly Hills but we simply CANNOT AFFORD IT. End of story.

11/24/2007 1:05 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

1:05 How many years have you lived in SB? My kids were born at GVH and grew up here. It is their home and they had to leave in order to make a future for themselves. Maybe you are the outsider and you should go back to LA. That way you can be closer to your beloved Bel Air. It's too bad you feel you have to compromise yourself to have to live in SB.

11/24/2007 7:23 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Outsiders ruined this once beautiful place and they should all go back to where they came from.

This is the EXACT attitude is why Santa Barbara is the most beautiful place to live on the outside, and one of the most vile and disgusting places to live on the inside.

It ain't the "outsiders" who are ruining Santa Barbara. It's attitudes like this.

11/24/2007 7:34 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

just for the record........I am "solidly middle class" and was able to buy a home here several years ago....does that make me a bad person? does that make me "upper middle class"? Stop fomenting the class warfare. As much as I might dream about having a Malibu beach house, that is not within my reach. Nor is it within my reach to even buy a home on the Riviera in Santa Barbara! I'll settle for my little bungalow on the westside and be grateful I have it. I know other "solidly middle class" people that are in the process of buying homes in the area now. Stop creating the myth of scarcity that demands that we alter the character of downtown.

11/24/2007 7:53 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Oh calm down. No one ever said anything about home owners being greedy. Unbridled support of property rights trumping the greater good? Now that's greedy.

11/24/2007 8:39 AM  
Anonymous 1000 Friends of Santa Barbara said...

response to 4:34

You just don't get it.

Santa Barbara has become Beverly Hills. ( Hope Rance and Montecito, Carmel , etc.)

Santa Barbara is a coastal resort beach town and is the most desireable place on the earth to live.

Because of this extreme desireability the prices of real estate have shot up extremely high.

what you don't seem to understand is that regular middle class folks like you and I could easily afford to buy a house here and make the payments in the years between 1950 and 1995. This is no longer the case.

But currently 90% of the houses in Santa Barbara are owned by middle class folks who purchased them years ago. These middle class represents around 50% of the entire population of Santa Barbara.

Now, the vast majority (around 85% according to surveys) have their number one goal to preserve our small town character, even if it means that no more middle class folks can purchase a house here. And around 15% have their number one goal to grow in order to provide new housing for future middle class who may want to move here.

Now few would expect Beverly hills to have to build thousands of new houses to be subsidized so that middle class folks could move there just because they wanted to live there. Few would expect Hope Ranch, Montecito, or Carmel to have to build thousands of subsidized new houses so that middle class folks who wanted to live there could.

It is the exact same thing now in Santa Barbara, where few think that a exclusive luxury coastal beach town can or should have to accomodate everyone who would like the luxury of living in a luxury and exclusive coastal beach town.

There are currently 38,500,000 folks in California, half of those now living only 100 miles away. The State is growing at 600,000 per year and will double to 77,000,000 folks in a short 40 years.

We have room for 100,000 people here in nSanta Barbara on this coastal shelf and water, resources and traffic capacity for 100,000. Consider just how many of the 77,000,000, the vast majority of whom are middle class, would just love to be able to move here and be able to buy a house which has the price subsidized by the folks who already live here. I would guess at least 1,000,000 middle class folks would live to be provided an affordable house in montecito, hope Ranch, Carmel, or Santa Barbara, the most beautiful and most desireable town on the planet.

So stop bashing the middle class folks who already own their own home, and who make up 50% of our towns population, just because they don't want to ruin the town by providing subsidized housing so that 1,000,000 middle class folks can move here.

11/24/2007 11:37 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

What! According to anon 7:34, Santa Barbara "is one of the most vile and disgusting places to live on the inside"....WHAT?! now, it is an attitude like THAT, no doubt spoken by one who does own his/her little piece of paradise right here in Santa Barbara, and yet advocates for nothing but subsidized housing..........just speculating but after reading these posts for a while its kinda not so hard to identify the interest groups of the anons....

11/24/2007 11:43 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

7:53 There is nothing wrong with working hard and being fortunate enough to buy a bungalow. I 'm not quite sure how you define middle class when bungalows run about $750k and the median income for a family of 4 is $67k. Hmmm, doesn't add up.

There is also nothing wrong with creating attractive, affordable living spaces for worker bees. Cities around the country recycle old office and warehouse space and turn it into fashionable studios, apartments and coops. Are you going to tell me that the crappy garage apartments and illegal dwellings that pepper downtown are better? How does that add to the character of downtown? Talk about density and zoning issues! Take away some of the fire trap illegal dwellings that homeowners use to make their payments and foreclosures would definitely increase.

11/24/2007 1:05 PM  
Anonymous Don Jose de la Guerra y Noreiga said...

Hey are all just passing through-- some sooner and some later. Take it easy. Carpe Diem.

The true Santa Barbara spirit is another dull day in paradise with the newly wed and the nearly dead.

Just kidding, it's...the soft sound of guiters, fiesta, dancing fandangos, beautiful women, rancheros, and vaqueros...not to mention Trader Joes.

Das says it's roofs covered with solar panels.

Hope you're not risking too much with that mortgage.

We all like Santa Barbara. We're doing fine. After all, have a little gratitude, my folks helped pick the location. And I was once one of the largest landowners in California. Then came the Americanos...

Don Jose

11/24/2007 1:34 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Gosh, strange how this post led back to the housing debate.

Since 1995 or so, there has been an extraordinary runup in home prices here... see

October Santa Barbara Real Estate Summary

It is quite likely that local prices will fall by 50% in the next few years. Great! That would solve a lot.

The current prices lock out all but about the top 10-20% of families in income. The scrimping and saving stories are now folktales from a past so long ago that they are irrelevant today.

The middle class simply cannot afford to buy here.

However, the taxes of the middle and lower classes subsidize the rich who do buy here, through sales tax, the mortgage interest tax deduction, and low property tax assessments for the wealthy.

Some may argue that this is just because we are becoming like Beverly Hills. But Beverly Hills is sustained by a lot of publicly owned oil royalties, and is a pretty weird example.

It is a matter of democracy, pure and simple. The rich have a lot of leisure time to spend on propaganda, and they do so and have a right to do so.

Until the lower 80% of us form serious voting blocs and vote for what we want, nothing will change.

To those who say new housing will ruin this place: remember, that was once true of your housing. Your housing ruined a previous ecological wonderland. Your life here depends on environmental devastation like Lake Cachuma, Highway 101, and a canyon in the Gaviota Coast where your trash is dumped. When you say you don't want to `ruin' this place, well, you already ruined it.

11/24/2007 1:51 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

1:05 front and center here...

THE PEOPLE HERE SUCK. It was NOT that way before the outsiders and developers came here and our city fathers did nothing to stop them from 'growing' what was once a 'no growth' community. I grew up here with the alleged knowledge that we would NEVER become like Los Angeles. Yet, here we are. Old money was in Montecito; new money was in Hope Ranch and it was fine. You inherited or you made a killing yourself.

Nice people have become insane, miserable, argumentative, hate spewing animals. And, to think we who have been here forever could not ultimately be affected would be impossible because 24/7 we are surrouned by the wannabes and the moaning, crying and attitudes of everyone here. No one here has a good attitude. It is all bad. I became 'ashamed' of telling anyone in my travels that I am from SB.
AND... if pressed and people LEARN I am from here, I tell them not to get excited about it... because it is ONLY PRETTY. Nothing else. No substance. People stink and it is definitely "L.A."

My 'wish' to be in Bel Air is only for the privacy of the super wealthy so I don't have to hear or see all that is going on here today. It will never end as our children are forced, yes forced, to move out and there goes the family..... blah blah blah. I am so "OVER" my formerly once wonderful HOME TOWN.

11/24/2007 4:04 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I have news for you---our downtown is already vibrant anf health, and we don't need a bunch of new monster condo "PROJECTS" to make our town vibrant.

Thanks, but no thanks!

11/24/2007 4:37 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...


You advocate that we should pack worker bees in like sardines on the 4th floor of some DENSE ticky-tacky downtowon condo BOX, where their children have no grass yard to play in, but will have to "play" in the downtown streets.
What kind of a life is that for a worker bee to be forced by "socialist engineers" to live in a ticky tacky box?

Wow , what a life you advocate for them.
I'll take owniong my own suburban single family house with a nice yard in Ventura or Santa Maria any day.

11/24/2007 4:47 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Yes this place is PARTLY already ruined, but the point is: why ruin what's left of it.

The fact is that we have just reached 100% of the carrying capacity and the resources and the traffic capacity.
The maximum population that can be sustainable on the south coast is 200,000 and, guess what, we have just reached 200,000 on the south coast.

it's time for zero population growth on the south coast.I ask you all this questrion; If not now. when? How many folks do you want living here and sharing our steets with their 100,000 max, carrying capacity. Do we stop growing at 1,000,000; or 500,000; or 300,000 or 150,000 or what? Now why that number? why not more? a lot more?

How much is enough. We have already built on most of the land and without building on every inch of our open space the only way to grow is up.

So I also ask you all : Just how high do you want to go? Just how high is high enough. Remember the higher we build the more and more we lose all views including oceran and mountain views and the less ands less sunliught shines on our plazas and paseos, sidewalks, and patios.
Remember all our historic buildings are 1 and 2 stories and they don't look right crammed in between between two 6 story buildings. RRemember that out existing charm and character is derived because of the human scale of our 1 and 2 story buildings and that this charm and character is just not possible with 4, or 6, or 10 story buildings.
do you want to stop iut at 20 stories? 10 stories? 6 stories or what? and why did you pick that number? why not more? At the time we reach YOUR desired limit there will still be thousands and thousands of middle calss folks that want to live in Santa Barbara.
One cannot build our way out of the problem of the desire to live in Santa barbara by more folks than can afford to live here. After reaching YOUR limit, why do you not keep provide for them indefinitely? Until all of Santa barbara is nothing but 10 story buildings with little boxes full of good little worker bees.

11/24/2007 5:12 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

If the state funds housing for the middle class, it is a welfare class, not the middle class.

Stop turning your nose up at $450,000 condos. People in Europe do just fine in flats, raise their childern and do just fine.

11/24/2007 6:16 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

This issue is not housing, the issue is the time for a commute.

There is plenty of affordable housing within an easy 45 minute commute. This is standard almost anywhere in California. If you can't afford to live in Santa Barbara proper, stop complaining.

You don't have a god given right to a short commute. That is the real issue here. The housing issue is dead.

And if you don't want to spend that commute time in some form of public transportation (bus or train), then talk to my hand about your problems.

11/24/2007 6:19 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Why does everybody assume that affordable housing has to be a big, ugly box? To use Memphis as an example, they are converting some absolutely beautiful old deco buildings and warehouses. I was impressed with how beautifully and carefully the buildings were being restored and updated. Again, why does affordable housing in SB have to be ugly box high rises or illegal garage apartments? I am sure some really creative architect could come up with something attractive, afforable and functional.

As to commuting, it is expensive, clogs the highway, and is definitely not environmentally friendly. You complain about the traffic on 101 and yet you expect workers to commute to SB. Great idea. What used to be a 30 minute commute has turned into an hour and a half commute because so many people were forced to move to Ventura. Oh, and it takes 55 minutes to get to Lompoc and 65 minutes to Santa Maria, that is without traffic. This is not an efficient solution and it is getting less efficient all the time. Got any other bright ideas?

11/24/2007 8:21 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

why is it people in Santa Barbara talk about commuting time as if it is something unheard of anywhere else, a unique function of this area!?!?!? People, face the music--- commutes happen all over this country---from cities to all the subsidized housing your heart desires, and there will STILL be a majority of workers who for whatever personal reasons they might have, choose to live's true in L.A., true in NYC, true in SF----it just IS.......

11/24/2007 9:16 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Hey 4:47: You addressed the wrong anonymous. I'm 1:05 and I guess I could clarify that it was 1:05 A.M., not P.M. and I wish everyone would go away. You know, I said the people here suck. Read what I said and find the other person you were addressing.

Thanks. I take lumps only for my own comments.

11/24/2007 10:07 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

OMG.... you want to start another argument 6:19? Can anyone remember when it took less than 5 minutes on 101 to get from downtown to La Cumbre Road? ANY TIME?

Commute? You insane? No one wants to commute. How about the people who live in Montecito, who, for as long as I can remember, can't possiby drive to Goleta because it is too far to drive. Now I recently heard that the same group can't possibly go to the Big Box for the same reason PLUS the time it takes to get there. And you want people to commute to and from work? Don't forget the whining about gasoline prices that will go with that argument.

Now if only there was intelligent conversation about the price of 'oil' - not the gas at the pump.

11/24/2007 10:16 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...


11/24/2007 10:38 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

You are right. The housing issue is dead. Santa Barbara is built out and up. Time to wake up the remaining members of the city council and tell them the train has left the station on this issue.

The issue now is commute time and that is a fact of life for anyone choosing to work in Santa Barbara. We owe you nothing to make your life easier if this is your choice. You knew this when you signed up for the job.

You are the one who has to change your lifestyle and that means public transportation to get to this job you chose. Get in it and get off the road in your greedy one person car.

You are clogging up the roads and fouling the air with your selfishness. The sooner you leave the area the better for the rest of us.

And no, in case you are getting it, your job is not all that essential to the well-being of Santa Barbara. We did just fine decades ago without all these new jobs and the whiners they attracted.

Moving all county operations to Santa Maria would be the first best step to take. Getting rid of a few thousand whining public employees would gladden the hearts of many in this town.

11/25/2007 8:03 AM  
Anonymous Don Jose de la Guerra y Noreiga said...

Advice from Don Jose:

If you all gave up anonymous as a name or moniker, life in the blog would be better with less confusion.

People are angry about housing and newcomers. I remind you again, we were all once "newcomers."

Relative newcomers who become pissed about newer newcomers is a morally corrupt position. "I've got mine now screw you" is just not right, sorry for the bluntness.

Where are the necessary people who work here going to live? What about them? If your kids stay, go to school here, work here, where are they going to live?

In the world that's coming, it can't be houses with two car garages, little yards with green lawns, nor can we keep building a bigger world with bigger freeways and more and more cars. That seems obvious. How many cars do you own? What kind of car? Why do you need more than 3000 square feet?

We could (or some of us could) be just fine living in a denser downtown, working downtown, in a culturally more lively place, with lots of cultural amenities. Everybody doesn't have to do it but some of us would like to do it.

If you live in the suburbs, you can't bitch about a denser downtown that's too dense and spoils your sense of place. Santa Barbara is not your Disneyland or local pleasant Shopping Mall.

Change is coming. Adjust.

Good planning is the answer. Don't lose the original Spanish Plan with the Chumash trails or paseos. Don't forget the Plaza and visit my house for additional planning ideas.

11/25/2007 8:38 AM  
Anonymous 4:47 said...

hey 10:07

I was addressing 1:05 p.m. on 11/24, who commented about why not house people like worker bees in some 4th storry box in another monstrosity on chapala..

You just happened tp post at the same 1:05 a.m.

11/25/2007 11:55 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Isn't this thread about the NP suing everything in sight and fighting just to win? And then not fully disclosing the situation on its own pages? Such action is ethically deplorable, and at least in the case of labor, possibly illegal.

11/25/2007 12:34 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

don jose 8;38

you say: growth is coming --adjust.

I say that you and other affordable housing and smart growth advocates are in the minority, and that the vast majority think that our town is fine just the way it is and we majority that don't want to grow, are going to resist you up until our dying breath.

You are losing in your battle for densifying our town, so, you get used to it.

And don't count your chickens before they're hatched.

You say good planning is the answer.
yes it is my friend. but good planning for our town is no growth planning. For our town high density smart growth planning is bad planning and the vast majority of our residents want no part of it.

You are being resisted by an overwhelming force.

11/25/2007 12:52 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

8:03 a.m.

You are so right on.

Excellent thinking. Keep it up. We need you.

11/25/2007 12:54 PM  
Anonymous Hiram Johnson said...

The force behind `no-growh' planning is greed, purely.

Existing homeowners who whine and complain continuously about their lifestyle being degraded just use that as a beard: they really only want their home value to escalate.

Realtors and their fellow travelers post here about `believing in the bubble' and the `worth' of Santa Barbara. In reality it is all a myth, and real estate prices will fall by 50% over the next 5 years.

The way out of our housing predicatment is to build, build, build and plan well. Tax car use with wireless meters to support public transit. Make existing water, sewage and electricity users, who enjoyed huge public subsidies to get those services, pay for utilities expansions to serve the new housing. Apply a 10% property tax to property value over $2 million and index that with inflation.

11/25/2007 5:55 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Yo: 8:03


Only one area of disagreement.
Decades ago, the pay scale here was poverty level. I recall one specific question asked of everyone being interviewed for the few jobs (low pay) availble here:

"WHY DO YOU WANT TO LIVE IN SANTA BARBARA?" Most would-be employees were stunned and after inquiring the reason for the question the answer was (and I believe still is): "You Have To Earn The Right To Live Here!"

True story.... I was there and those were the company rules.
Now that I look around at this point, I think that statement is more a'propos than ever.

11/25/2007 6:19 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Lookj at the old city general plan that is now being updated. Guess what the leading problem was way back then: cost of housing.

Yes, loss of real property appreciation is a quality of life issue. Why do you think it is not. No one is scamming that it is not. It is a vested interest in every real property owning voter here. And we are the majority so you will just have to go along with this democratic finding.

You played the guilt card long enough in this town and we now have plenty of subsidized housing for every possible alleged under-privileged group.

If you did not get on the subsidized housing gravy train, then you were asleep at the switch because that train has now left the station. And all the many cars are now full. The no vacancy sign is lit.

11/25/2007 6:41 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...







11/25/2007 9:42 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Thanks for the perspective 9:42. There is no doubt that SB has always been expensive. Even in 1977 it was expensive, just as it was in 1985 when I bought my first home. The difference is that prices and income were more in line with each other than they are now. $25k is closer to $95k than $70k is to $450k for a condo or $800k for a house like yours. More people could potentially save for a down payment and actually qualify for a loan based on their incomes.

11/26/2007 4:06 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

The flow of BAZILLIONAIRES from all over the world into our "charming" little town has only just begun, as baby boomers from everywhere cash in their 401ks and decide they too want to live in paradise in their final 2-3 decades of life on earth. Oh joy.
But building subsidized low income housing will do nothing other than meet the demands for servants that these folks will have. So, let's get over that myth please.

11/26/2007 7:41 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Makes no sense to moan about the median price real estate here due to the high-end price distortion factor. The entry price is the only number you want to look at and that is in the low $400,000's.

And last listings in the NewsPress real estate section shows plenty of choices in the entry level price. Pick up a copy.

So quit complaining about the million dollar homes you cannot afford, because you can't. But if you can't afford the entry level home here, then you are looking to live in a town you cannot afford. Look elsewhere, where you can.

I can't afford to live in Montecito and I do not spend my days and nights on the computer complaining and demanding Montecito find a place I can afford. That is exactly how your whining arguments sound to the rest of us who do live in Santa Barbara. Dead ears.

Get on the subsidized housing list because that is your reality, or get a new channel because your complaints here have been tuned off.

11/26/2007 8:00 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

The rich are getting richer and the poor are getting larger ... Within the next generation or two, the middle class will be all but wiped out in this country.

This is what sowed the seeds of revolution in countries like France and Russia. I worry about the future of America with clans such as the McCaws and the Bushes as its stewards.

Well, at least the cats and coyotes will be taken care of.

11/26/2007 8:42 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Ha! Ha! Ha! Entry level home at $400k. Do you even realize how ridiculous that sounds? Let's see, that might buy a 1 bedroom condo with a deck or a 30-40 year old mobile home. What is an old trailer worth most places? Maybe a couple of thousand for scrap! I don't care where you put it or how you dress it up, it is still an old MH built to HUD specs, which ain't crap. Thanks, but no thanks. I prefer to invest my hard earned money in a part of the country that is affordable and growing. In reality, SB ain't all it's cracked up to be, and the new, snooty LA crowd is determined to make life miserable for all except the rich.

11/26/2007 6:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

The middle class is an artificial construct made up primarily of government funded public employees with strong unions and tons of taxpayer funded benefits.

Nothing will be lost if we lose the middle class. Lower taxes will be the immediate benefit, but the work done by most of these middle class workers can be easily farmed out to the private sector, at half the cost and twice the appreciation.

11/26/2007 7:21 PM  
Anonymous Whew! said...


this string of blog comments has turned into the most interesting yet.

Just goes to show that the housing problem and the ( small) city planning problem are much more interesting and worthwhile a topic to discuss than the much over used ( and now boring boring boring) news press blogs.

Sara, I BEG of you . Please put an end to the news press blogs for a coupolke months. PLEASE!
signed: Your greatest admirer ( except for that)

11/26/2007 7:45 PM  
Anonymous Hiram Johnson said...

Condo prices are falling... see page 16 of:

Santa Barbara Association of Realtors

Only a fool would buy a condo now!

But the free market is the way to take care of our housing problem. Build Build Build! That is the American way, the free market. Let the supply side solve our problems. Anything else is socialism.

11/26/2007 7:58 PM  
Blogger Sara De la Guerra said...

7:45 -- I assume you posted the other comment from a post that is two weeks old as well. The truth is that posts on what is happening in our community, which include what is happening at DLG Plaza, is what people comment and participate about. I can only ask that you not be too upset when there is a post -- you also can't know how many times I've forgone doing a post that was a home run because I am tired of it all too. The simple way around it is to also choose to see all of the posts and many comments on other issues -- the recent housing-related ones are fine examples of that. Thanks for your feedback and know that I have pulled back but there are times when something needs to be said.

11/26/2007 9:58 PM  
Anonymous 7:45 said...

You assume correctly.

Don't worry i don't get too upset.

Upset is the wrong word.

What I see whenever I see a new blog posted about the News Press is a waste of peoples time, energy and talents --all going to waste.

Not much new here but the same old stuff. the original blog posted is always saying something nasty about the news press then it brings out the same old defenders and this in turn brings out the same old detractors. it's really the same 20 folks saying the very same thing over and over and over until I'm nauseated.

I know you are trying to keep things interesting but why not cut the new blogs about the news press to one a week MAX. That should be enough for the very same 20 folks entertained bickering with each other over nothing.

Be realistic. just what can come of these conversations---NOTHING AT ALL.

however in contrast the diverse conversations on housing and city planning are bringing in some fantastic new and fresh comments. If we could get these 50 or so folks all together at one time in one room with an open mind and a cooperative spirit we could maybe do something real amazingly good and worthwhile for the people of our city.
Sara, you are our leader. Please show some true leadership. You will be surprised at the good that can come out of this.

I suggest a blog on the pros and cons of illegal immigration and anoither one on how to solve the gang problem and a third on the pros and cons widening the freeway. I could come up with ideas all night.
Sweet dreams.

11/27/2007 12:52 AM  
Blogger Sara De la Guerra said...

Thanks for your thoughts -- we've covered many of those issues over time. The gang problem is a common topic and the widening issues brought a great deal of comments.

If you have a great idea and write a community post, I'd be happy to post it! Thanks again for your thoughts.

11/27/2007 7:38 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Teamsters File Charge Against Santa Barbara News-Press For Undermining Union

Nov. 27, 2007 -- Santa Barbara -- Today the Graphics Communications Conference of the International Brotherhood of Teamsters is filing an unfair labor practice charge with the National Labor Relations Board against the Santa Barbara News-Press to protest the newspaper's latest union avoidance gambit: using "temporary" employees allegedly through a temporary agency subcontractor to perform newsroom work that the NLRB has certified must be performed by employees represented by the Union. The NLRB just certified the Union in August, 2007 to represent the news department employees, and but a month before, according to information provided to the Union by the Employer, it has been subcontracting its newsroom work to third party "temporary" agencies, and asserting that those"temporary" employees - performing the same work as are union-represented employees - are employed by a third party instead of Ampersand.

"This union avoidance ploy will not stand", said Nick Caruso, chief negotiator for the Union. "We tried to address and resolve this fundamental issue at the bargaining table without adversary action or rancor, but the Employer insisted it has the right to continue to shrink the bargaining unit (now at approximately 23, according to the Employer) while adding in unprecedented fashion, an allegedly "temporary" workforce. This transparent union evasion scheme should not be tolerated by the federal agency created to enforce and protect employee rights, including the basic right to be represented by the Union, especially at this delicate stage of the bargaining process", Caruso added.

The Board will conduct an investigation and determine whether to prosecute Ampersand and what enforcement action it will take.


11/27/2007 6:58 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Are there any "LEGAL BEAGLES" out there to address 11/27 6:58 post?

As a long time employer, I don't (think) an employer can be forced to hire full time employees. YES, I can be wrong with all new rules and laws so that's why I'm asking.
I just know the people I employ are mostly part time... reduces work comp plus no health insurance costs. A small business. Anyone?

11/28/2007 2:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Woof woof the crime dog here - the union has a very poor case here and is just trying to rattle some cages. Notice how they hedged their final decision.

The union has been giving its alledged constituents some exceedingly poor advice. Methinks this guy is just trying to extend his tenure in Santa Barbara rather than pack up his tent and go back to where ever union guys come from -- probably some place cold and backwards.

The union has Ampersand all tied up in legal knots waiting for a decision on whether they have to hire back their previous full time workers. So reasonably Ampersand hires temps until that ruling become final after appropriate appeal and review. Because they are being threatened in the courts that they have to give back these jobs now being filled with temps. And now the rocket scientists in the union are screaming Ampersand is using too many temps.

Got it now ..... the union is talking out of both sides of their mouth which eventually is not going to go down in some labor court at all.

Plus the decided conservative shift of the new Bush Supreme court is not going to find in favor of any union playing these games with private employers at all.

Union gave workers really bad advice when they told them it was okay to hang the banner because this was a protected union activity. But seemed to miss the point these very workers were already on notice for poor job performance and their firings had nothing at all to do with any protected union activity. That alone should put everyone on notice they were not getting good advice.

Then the union's very poor court performance that left the vast majority of their case unproven and nothing valid offered for rebuttal of the defendant's defense.

So this currernt union duplicity talking out of both sides of their mouth show how incompetent their legal representation is.

They are sending two contradictory messages at the same time: (1) keep the jobs open because we want you to hire back your former
workers and (2) stop using temporary workers because you are violating the spirit of union representation.

No wonder everyone is confused. Except Ampersand. They called it right, right from the beginning. Time will vindicate them. Sorry to report, but you will all just have to find a way to stomach this outcome.

BTW: did you notice Barney trying to out distance Travis on the big building over-build out of Santa Barbara and the threats of political heads to roll?

Barney and Travis sounding like doppelganger clones. Imagine that. More power to both of them. The issues transcend the personalities finally.

11/28/2007 9:38 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...


You are just plain wrong.

ANY private business or company has a LEGAL RIGHT to hire part time workers.

the grocery stores all get away with it and they are all unionized. do you think the powerful grocery worker union would let the stores get away with it if it were not legal.

The union sympathizers are just frustrated and angry that the news press was smart enough to find a good legal loophole. More power to them

And to the union sympathizers I say: like it or lump it.

11/28/2007 10:32 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Errr, Crime Dog, your post makes no sense.

Why would the News-Press bother to hire temps in anticipation of bringing the fired reporters back someday if the paper's court case in fighting that eventuality was so airtight, as you suggest?

Talk about having it both ways ...

11/28/2007 11:16 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Thank you, woof woof for the speedy and detailed answers I asked about... The best part turns out to be the exact opposite of what the fabricator Craig has been telling.

I thought NP was doing right and I appreciate you telling all. I'm for NP so I don't have to suck anything up or hurt my tummy. It is the NP haters who will go nuts now. I hope you are not sorry to report 'good' news. I wasn't sure ... Nice Job.

11/28/2007 11:23 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Craig sad to say is letting the tail wag the dog; he fits every thing he writes into his anti-Wendy agenda, whether is is true or appropriate or not.

Craig is best read if your goal is to keep your panties in a bunch over the NewsPress. But not for facts or objective analysis.

You see, Craig is biased (gasp) and to his credit he never presents himself otherwise.

11/29/2007 6:36 AM  
Anonymous Last Word Police said...

woof woof and anon 11:23 -

Again, you champion the cause of property over community and people. What a brave stance you take. And to do this, you add to the smear campaign of McCaw's former employees.

I don't care that you worship the rich. But I do care that you insinuate my friends were fired for being less than 100 percent professional. Imagine what you wish, but McCaw fired a highly skilled, award winning newsroom because they legally formed a union.

I will not let money worshipers get the last word on this subject. Workers do have rights, and the reporters were exceptional and honored workers at their craft.

You can wish this were not true, or believe the McCaw camp spin, but for every allegation of bias you can provide sans evidence, I can point you to awards the former staffed received. Funny how those accolades have stopped coming in at the NP.

11/29/2007 7:14 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

advice to the news press;

Change all the jobs in the newsroom to part time 20 hours per week jobs. You can do this legally. Then offer the union employees part time jobs if they want them.
Few would accept, and so you are now rid of them.

period.. the end!

11/29/2007 8:10 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

To correct Crime Dog .....

Only a minority of the reporters fired actually received poor performance reviews, and the dog fails to note that the paper was prosecuted for administering those reviews, because they were full of trumped up lies and were grossly inconsistent with previous annual evaluations.

11/29/2007 10:15 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Many jobs in this town are structured to be solely part time, using many parttime workers to create full time job services. And people line up to take these jobs.

So stop thinking you as an employee controls the marketplace; it is always controlle by the employer who is controlled by the customers.

Employees are fungible and if they don't like it they should become owners and entrepreneurs. Plenty do like being just employees and they take what they get and everyone is happy.

Being an employee is not all that bad because you don't carry the bottom line burdens of meeting a payroll week after week.

When you own your own business, then you get to set your own rules. But be sure to get back to me if all the sudden you find yourself living by very different rules.

11/29/2007 2:46 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Last word: let's both wait until the court ruling before you claim the NewsPress fired people for protected union activities.

Sworn testimony in court revealed the extent of managament performance concerns about fired employees, registered long before the freeway banner incident.

To repeat these facts presented in court is not "smearing" anyone. Please retract your accusations and rethink your conclusion reached before court judgment about employee activities .That is why we have a court system.

Please don't undermine our legal system before it does its job. Your bias is corrupting your judgment, your writing and your accusations. Chill.

11/29/2007 2:50 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I swear, if I read another one of you lock-stepping News-Press zombies use the word "bias," my head is going to explode. Stop! Please! In the name of everything that's holy!

11/29/2007 9:15 PM  
Anonymous Smarty Pants said...

woof woof:

You are correct, your detractors are wrong. I looked up what you said after I asked.

The code is clear.

Rest of you should go to the Law Library before pontificating on NP and Union laws. LAWS - PLURAL.

11/29/2007 11:11 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Smarty Pants, you do not convince.

Please cite the code section so we can all go see for ourselves.

Maybe you could provide a link?

11/30/2007 1:15 PM  
Anonymous Golden Rule said...

Anon 2:50Pm and Smarty Pants:

The facts are all out there, so while you wait for authority figures to tell you what to think, I'm reading the writing on the wall. McCaw's actions are at best self-serving, and I'll go to my grave believing that's not an admirable way to lead your life. Set your moral compass by our illiterate draft-dodging President's cake-eating, born-again court appointments all you'd like...

11/30/2007 2:36 PM  
Anonymous VIDEOGRAPHER said...


Where is the my post?

Can't be any weirder than what is on here 24/7.

I'm sure deep down you want to say the same but cannot do so as moderator???

Yes, I am a Videographer and a woman as well if this gets you to post what I wrote. Thanks

11/30/2007 2:55 PM  
Blogger Sara De la Guerra said...

Videographer -- sorry about that. I may have not moderated within the context of the comment. I cannot, however, retrieve comments once they are not published. I'll do my best to think about that more from now on.

11/30/2007 5:38 PM  
Anonymous Smarty Pants said...

The law will prevail unless corrupt SB officials YOU voted in get the Judge's ear. The only reason there IS an authority figure is because the City went nuts when NP fired Jerry, Barney and his minions walked out, and then there was a free for all of the 60's generation stirring up the employees remaining. This is the short of it but have at it as it is what you enjoy. How close are you to the grave anyway?

Meantime, I do NOT work for anyone other than myself so trip on down to the LAW LIBRARY and very nice people will POINT YOU in the direction of the code. I note that commenters who try to help with facts here just get pooped on so why bother? Lazy Marys.

11/30/2007 11:36 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

to golden rule 2:36 p.m

You say Wendy's actions are "self seving" as it that were a horrible thing.

Just whats wrong with one being self serving. Is it each of our job to serve everyone elde but ourself?

If every person in our community was responsible for their own live, and took care of their own self, and minded their own business, everything would be o.k.

People are so jealous of Wendy's wealth that it drives them nuts. the fact that Wendy runs the business that SHE OWNS the way SHE WANTS drives some people absolutely nuts.


12/01/2007 11:26 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

ANON 11:26 a.m.:

You have said it all but no one will pay attention. And, they will never get over it!

Never saw/heard such ENVY.

Amazing that these same people Worship at the Altar of OPRAH! Are there degrees of mega wealth that determines how good or bad the super rich are treated?

12/01/2007 9:15 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

To 11:26 A.M. and 9:15 P.M.

It's not Wendy's wealth that has so many upset. It's her lies and deceit. Here's what she told us -- in print.

"... I plan to leave the day-to-day management and editorial direction of our paper to the professionals who run it. An essential reason for buying the News-Press is to preserve its independence and integrity." 7-22-2000

"To make the News-Press an even more professionally and personally rewarding place to work, I welcome your comments, recommendations and feedback so we can have an open dialogue to work collectively and collaboratively as we further improve the quality, coverage and accuracy of our paper." 7-19-2006

"While I don't believe that union representation is in the best interests of our employees, the paper or this community, I respect our employees' rights to make their own decisions." 7-25-2006

"We are in the process of hiring a new editor who is a strong journalist with impeccable credentials to be the buffer between the newsroom and the publisher." 7-25-2006

"I will personally continue to work in 2007 to ensure that you receive the best local coverage that can be provided, not only this year, but beyond." 1-1-2007

12/01/2007 10:48 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Thank you 10:48 ...

And to all you News-Press lovers, those words of McCaw come straight from the News-Press print edition.

Listen up Santa Barbara !!!

It was NEVER WENDY'S CHOICE whether the News-Press newsroom enjoys union representation.

That choice belongs to the workers there. Period.

And, well, Wendy said it herself under her own byline. See that above? That's called a citation. She really really said that. In writing.

Deal with it, people. Respect these employees' rights via the Constitution of the United States of America.

This is settled case law. Period. A Constitutional right. Period.

This was the News-Press employees' choice. Not yours. Not Wendy's. Not anyone's but those 39 individual citizens. It bears repeating.

What a disgrace this new money News-Press "leadership" regime has wrought upon our town.

Uggh. It defies sense, class and civic duty.

Is this the best S.B. has to offer? No way.

By the way, do you enjoy your weekends? How about that 8 hour day? You can thank the labor movement.

It's not been said for a while, but thanks to all those journalists who took a stand and spoke out.

You did Santa Barbara a great service under intense pressure.

Thank you all.

12/02/2007 2:29 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Holy Poop! (edit it Sara if you wish)

I cannot believe what you posted,
10:48 pm.

You just showed everyone that Wendy is exactly like Marty, Das, Helene, Barnwell ()who is almost gone)... Lois, the big liar, Capps, and every single national politician in office plus all those are who are currently running for office. Can you even imagine the number of lies to be told by those clowns betwen now and November 08? It will be incalculable!

PEOPLE SAY ANYTHING AND EVERYTHING, including all business people. Sales people have to lie.

Just go back and recall all the slimy CEO'S (those in jail, those waiting to go to jail and those still to be sentenced) who took lessons from the Clintons and learned to STEAL with extreme prejudice from their Employees with the help of Clinton's rules and regulations and then that carried over to Bushie and his crew who did not have the cajones to fire all the Clinton legal staff and put in a team where he personally could take responsibility too. I wonder if he left that group in place to hide behind when things hit the fan.
Neither president was/is a saint. There will never again be a good president as the liars are running the asylum once known as the United States of America.

Good grief, man, are you living under a rock?

Who do you think ... just name someone ... who tells the darned truth today about anything?
Don't lie because I will know.

What about all the advertisers who have killed people with lies about medicines? What about the tobacco industry liars? Huh? How many people are dead because of cigarettes and other tobaccos?

What about all the meds currently advertised on TV which can scare anyone into being a hypochondriac and if you don't believe that, ask your doctor what he has to put up with when patients run to him for the 'latest' cure-all. Notice, too, how the stinking ads go out of their way to make a laundry list of side effects. Yet, people will be taken in and think there is a cure for their ailment. All Lies.

The latest lie is about Women's care. It's going around at the moment and if you have women you love in your life, tell them to be very careful about what their doctors tell THEM to do based on the new drugs being peddled that will kill them.

What about any and everyone in this currently insane world? Everyone lies. There are a few people who still believe it is a sin to lie but darn it, they will do it if they wish and they want to get where they are going. So the Catholics go to confession and the Jews have their day of atonement and they believe that all is forgiven. So they go out and start lying again.

So, Let's talk about bias in the paper!

It's just lies there too on all sides. Left lies, Right lies and 'middle' lies. Plus we, the people, have to try to sift through everthing and try to figure it out. It's darned near impossible.

You know the only two things that are certain: Death and Taxes. And there is no lie in that statement.

Dare we even think of telling the truth to the simplest question lest we offend some one or some cause? Political correctness has gone off the reservation so we are all living lies.

The Santa Claus bit in news recently about his not being able to say "HO HO HO" lest if offend the 'hoes' which is a farm tool and I don't think they have a brain to care.

What about Christmas? Huh? It is a LIE to tell a kid there is no Christmas. Just a *** holiday.

Or would you rather tell a kid, there never was a Santa and peole have been lying about that for years? See? Lies. Everything is a lie of you look closely.

How long can you personally go in a day without lying? Can you consciously count your lies and total them up at the end of the day just to test yourself?

I can't and I believe I am a very good person.

12/02/2007 2:54 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

response to 2:54

Yes, those unhappy with the news press are lying.

The reporters dismissed for being writing biased stories are lying ( "justified in their mind as SPINNING"). Reporters "spin" things every day and are geting so good at it that they now believe in their own lies.

And the stinkin Union is the biggest lier of all.

Liar, liar, pants on fire
Nose as long as a telegraph wire.

12/02/2007 5:55 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

OB-GYNs are killing and harming women with their drugs. Thanks for bringing this up. This is true and it needs more publicity. Shocking really, and few are complaining.

12/02/2007 8:30 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

5:55 Obviously you don't work for McCaw or are one of her few supporters at the NP. Otherwise you would know how ridiculous your little tirade was.

8:30 Amen! The women in this couuntry are being prescribed a bunch of toxic crap. The doctors are buying into it which is worse. I recently read an article written by a doctor at Harvard who blamed the synthetic hormones on thousands of uneccessary deaths.

I was having a terrible time with perimenopause. My husband essentially told me to deal with it or he would leave! Being a horse lover, I researched about PMU farms, and decided I didn't want to support them. I also read articles on the various pharmaceutical research being done on synthetic hormones and realized how toxic progestin and premerin really were so decided to find a natural alternative. I read books and was most impresssed with Dr. John Lee and his writing on the subject. I decided to try a natural progesterone product he recommended and have been using it successfully for years. I know many others who have done the same and even one lady who dumped her premerin. She didn't need it anymore. My doctor told me that I would be back for the patch because the natural cream doesn't work. Hmmm, tell that to the women and their husbands that I know. They would laugh.

We do have choices, but we have to be proactive in our own care. There are natural, non toxic alternatives to Premerin and Progestin but you have to do the research and find out what works best for you.

12/03/2007 3:57 AM  
Anonymous had it said...

I have absolutely HAD IT with the News press haters.

I'm so angry that I could punch a hole in the wall.


Your actions are going to bring forth the biggest backlash in history against you.

You all deserve whatever you get.

12/04/2007 12:22 AM  
Anonymous Womens meds Poster for 3:57 and others said...

I am 2:54 - regarding the women's meds part - and I am SO happy you read at least my tirade on drugs given to women (in addition to everyone else) enough for you to comment and confirm. Please pass on to all your loved women and men as well.

The drug reps walk carefree into doctors' offices while he is seeing patients and you KNOW the doctor can't be giving full attention to the sales pitch. So, the rep leaves the samples, assuring the doctor that all is well. The good doctor begins with samples, then he will start writing the RX's and unless someone dies immediately, that drug is on its way to being a utopian answer to the malady du jour. (You have seen all the recalls in the past few years.)

ALL OF US, and especially with parents who need help, must monitor and question every single drug that is being served up on silver platters. Your pharmacist is truly "your best friend" so get to know him/her. They are the only pro's on whom we can rely.

The doctors are so good and work hard but they will admit to having little to zero schooling in nutrition so they read your sugar numbers and cholesterol numbers and hand you an RX for pills. Some will ask about your diet; but most write the RX. And I am NOT blaming the doctors. I do not wish to alienate them.

BUT... today... We must all take charge of our medical care and do nothing without answers and even getting a second opinion on what meds to take... or not.

I have been caretaker to 5 close family members and then I became ill for 5 years. I actually had to leave SB for diagnosis and treatment and not that I wanted to. The wonderful doctors here, all of them, had no clue what I had. The city health department did not even pick up the fact I had something where I should have been tested for a quarantine issue. It all fell through the cracks. careful. Be very careful.

One last women's concern to mention is Ovarian Cancer. Because of alleged 'no symptoms' it is a killer. But, you must find a doctor who will concur and set you up for a pelvic ultrasound. That alone, is the ovarian cancer lifesaver. Just like the baseline chest exray, we women must demand that examine even if we have to make up a symptom because the doctors are scrutinized by even the best insurance companies as to WHY this patient needs this test.

Thanks for reading my other post and I hope you see this one as well. I won't bother you again but felt compelled to do this after reading your posts.

12/04/2007 12:59 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Dr John Lee is a debunked con artist with absolutely no scientific foundation to his claims for "natural" progesterone.

This is one of the biggest snake oil hoaxs perpetrated to date on women. $40 bucks a month for an industrially created product OTC with not even enough drug product in it to register past a cosmetic and expensive skin cream designation.

Can you spell placebo? $40 a month and the hugely expensive cockamamy saliva tests telling you to buy more and more of this product is one huge money transfer system, again at women's expense.

Locally we have one of the best grounded women's health experts, Dr Susan Love.

Read her books for free at the library, take her scientific research and evaluation analysis of all the women's health care frauds out there to heart, save your self huge amounts of money not falling for these "natural" snake oil hucksters, give yourself time and you will sail through any normal time of biological transformation under your own power as an adult and not as some immature kid still believing in magical answers, magical products and supertitious pseudo-science (read profit greedy snakeoil salespeople.)

Only in America do women make a full time career out of "perimenopause". And that is because they let themselves be led around by the nose of marketing frauds like Dr John Lee - who taught a class in public health at college of Marin and did not do one lick of valid scientific research on anything.

He just moved in callously to exploit women and their midlife sense of vulnerability and laughed all the way to the bank using the exact same Premarin marketing frauds and substituting his cheaply make "natural" progesterone junk creams in their place for the new-age aging hippy crowd.

Wake up women and stop throwing away money you should be saving for your own retirement and giving it to all these local charletons who are feathering their own retirement nests instead at your expense.

12/04/2007 8:24 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

To 12:22 a.m. from a News-Press hater:

You say my actions are going to bring forth the biggest backlash in history against me? What, a pocks upon my house? A horse head in my bed? A burning cross on my lawn? What exactly are you threatening me with?

Glad to see you believe in the free exchange of ideas and opinions, like your newspaper-opening queen.

12/04/2007 8:39 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Your post sounds like you are one angry male figure. Wow! Not a sensitive, caring or believing thought about the woman?

Agree with the junk science but to say women make a career out of perimenopause is crazy. (too tired to copy your exact words.)

You did not weigh in on current hormone therapy treatment (HRT) or don't you know? Stop being angry when you should be supportive. It's all temporary. Do you know that years ago women were 'put away' with all kinds of mental dianosis and some were forced to use unmentionable (here) methods.

Women have a choice with HRT. If they are truly suffering the worst type symptoms, they can sign on to HRT and they say to themselves, "Quality life now or Quantity in misery." Give or take 5 years at most. (Same for most cancers.)

No brainer to me. We are all going to die and in some cases take risks as we really don't know when, right? Cancer patients do it all the time. Gambling with their lives while many oncologists have become snake oil salesmen too. You should all treat yourselves to an Oncologist's consultation with a cancer patient. Used cars, anybody?

Definitely stay away from snake oil clowns and that other female doctor in town with her own cash cow business, books, meds of all types. UNREAL. If any pre-menopausal woman heard her, they would run for their lives as she is the kind that scares the pants off the women who start down the road to menopause and get suckered in by her. Talk about a charlatan!

12/04/2007 9:32 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Nothing wrong with angry women; only with frigthened men.

12/05/2007 10:39 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

9:32: all the science shows every form of HRT drugs (horse or soy/yam)decreases the quality of life for women. Look it up in PubMed for the overwhelming and undewhelming research. No product delivers what its marketing claims. None. Period.

All you are doing when you think you are buying menopause comfort, is transferring enough money to a third party in exchange for their false promises that you will be better.

Which happens naturally over time, while you are shelling out big bucks every month to believe these frauds.

Please do some research before you believe any of these drug/product charletons.

Busting the expensive and harmful myths about menopause and the huge industry it has fostered exploiting baby-boomer women is as supportive as you can get. You have things all backwards.

Read Susan Love's book on menopause cover to cover, take all that money you planned on throwing away, apply some common sense during this highly marketed transition time, and save all that money for your retirement. That is the best way to improve your quality of life, now and in the future. And then take it easy, surrender to Nature and what she wants to teach you now, let it flow, stop fretting and making such a career out of being a Menopause Martyr and let time take its course.

Been there done that. And trust me, not spending huge amounts of money on junk science is the most supportive advice you will ever need to get. This too will pass.

And follow the money back to any bit of menopause info you pick up and you will see why and how this massive marketing scheme works.

12/05/2007 10:48 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

9:32 -- you busted the most obvious menpause charleton in town but every other marketing scheme, including your doctor's BigPharm agenda uses exactly the same formula: Scare tactics, threats, impossible promises .... and the montly transfer of relatively large sums of money.

12/05/2007 10:51 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

8:39 a.m.

The backlash is nothing physical but that you are creating an extreme dislike of you.

How does it feel to be extremely disliked?

12/05/2007 3:05 PM  
Anonymous Menopause Sally - past said...

9:32 here replying to two - I believe.

I was being factual, nothing else.

Every human body is different and the patient has to take charge of his/her care which includes research on your own. What is good for one is not good for another.

With that said, Menopause is easy for some, difficult for others and as I said, the patients makes the choice for quality or quantity. If you are afraid to DIE... you choose quantity and ride out the misery if you have any. But you cannot pontificate to women as a whole. The charlatons (sp?) and some doctors will scare a preacher.

But in the end, and I am serious about menopause and cancer being close ... the patient has to make that decision on her (his) own hoping they have sense to research (or help of close one)and not follow anyone blindly.

Love/Schmove on the book as is "Sex Lies and Menopause" and that other unnamed doc here in SB with her books and potions.

Back to the old days, if you were unlucky enough to see mothers and grandmothers suffer and I mean suffer either from natural menopause or forced by surgery, then you would have a more open mind to once again, quality or quantity. For ME? No matter what happens to me, MY PILLOW will end the pain.

One cannot paint a broad brush regarding women's health. It is too important to family after herself. So the decision is up to her with education, not suggestions by friends or foe.

I wish I could get 3 friends to tell you their experiences with and without HRT. Unreal.

Just one example is my closest female relative.
Our mothers are sisters. All four of us are so much alike it is scary. We all made our own decisions on health care.

Fear in my (9 month older than I am cousin) kept her from even talking to a professional anything about menopause and her horrendous experiences that could have been relieved short time so her "son" would not have to suffer too.

For me, there WAS (some will recognize him by reference) THE BEST physician who was ahead of his time in women's health care and he actually gave his time to have seminars for women to help educate in the right way. But he said it was "her" decision based on all scenarios without scaring one woman. (I find it difficult to explain what he did and how well he did it.) I was young at the time but when I reached THAT age, I remembered and began research.

I made my decision.

My cousin, who is 58, looks 90. She looks like a prune. Her skin is dry, her hair is dry and she is nervous 24/7 without being psycho. Her memory? Almost like dementia as I have seen many times first hand. There is nothing physically wrong with her otherwise. NOTHING.

I am 57. I look maybe 40. My body is perfect and I hate to exercise so I don't do much. My skin, my hair, my memory is perfect. I sleep. I eat. I'm so healthy my doctor tosses me out of his office annually with the great numbers on my blood test results. So I am NOT spending money. Insurance covers the annual preventive physical. My 2 meds cost me $3.00.

I chose to give up some life (if it really turns out that what I take will kill me) to have the life I have. I have a feeling of well being all the time as I did 99percent of my life before menopause. Then, I thought "quit the day job" and do what you love. So I did and my RIGHT brain came to life which was put on hold when I chose the big career.

Without the energy, looks, etc. I would be miserable and I will NOT be miserable or cause my loved ones to live with such a person. The men have a "clue" but they do not know what to do. Some are supoortive, some go off the reservation. My husband is a genius in that he, too, researches everything medical and scientific and would not let me ingest a thing that could kill me before I'm ready to be killed.

My only suggestion is to "engage" like-mindeds but keep an "open mind" for those who need some help. Remember the cancer analogy. I did not have it but oversaw 24/7 care for 3 close friends and 2 relatives and was hands on with those doctors and especially the "sales" oncologists who "talk to the family" rather than the patient and then the patient, who wants to die, lives in misery because the oncologist convinced the family to spend the money on chemo, etc. I refer to all the charlatans (sp?) as "NEEDING A NEW PORSCHE."

That's my personal input instead of scaring women as you seem to be doing a little bit here. (FYI, in my career job, I did conservator care that went with the job if necesssary as the people aged. Saying this so you know I'm not a nut case and the people were strangers/clients.)

I only initally wrote about the scare tactics (my subject was about LIARS) because some doctors will NOT help and they will just write an RX and I was only giving THAT warning initially. Plus the other scare: ovarian cancer ads that are presently on tv, etc. Don't listen.
Get the pelvic ultrasound.

That is all. I guess to get attention, I should write my own book but I personally would not read it; it would be like succumbing to Oprah and Dr. Phil.

(sorry for any typos; I'm tired.)

12/05/2007 10:21 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

3:05 p.m. ...

How does being so disliked for being a News-Press hater make me feel?

It makes me feel like kicking my pet coyote.

12/06/2007 12:11 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

ho ho ho 12:11 a.m.

You and your coyote are just going to HATE the editorial in News-Press today. You owe the angst to yourself to find and read it.

I love the paper and the editorial today is outstanding.

12/06/2007 6:22 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I really, really, really dislike unions.

Oh, and did I mention that I dislike unions?

12/07/2007 8:28 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Go Wendy.

All the best to you. You deserve it!

Stick it out. You will win in the end.

12/07/2007 8:29 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Win what? A multi-million dollar deficit? Certainly not any journalism awards.

Well, congratulations, anyway.

12/07/2007 7:34 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

You really dislike unions?

Hey, next time you see a Santa Barbara cop or a Santa Barbara firefighter, be sure to let em know!

12/08/2007 4:15 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

4:15 next time I see a cop I WILL let them know that I despise unions.

They can like what salary the city management offers the or LUMP IT!

poor babies!

12/10/2007 1:00 AM  

Post a Comment

<< Home