Ask a Hipster — Advice you didn't know you needed
Big Screen — Movie commentary
Blurt — Music's inside track
Booze News — San Diego spirits
Classical Music — Immortal beauty
Classifieds — Free and easy
Cover Stories — Front-page features
Drinks All Around — Bartenders' drink recipes
Excerpts — Literary and spiritual excerpts
Feast! — Food & drink reviews
Feature Stories — Local news & stories
Fishing Report — What’s getting hooked from ship and shore
From the Archives — Spotlight on the past
Golden Dreams — Talk of the town
The Gonzo Report — Making the musical scene, or at least reporting from it
Letters — Our inbox
Movies@Home — Local movie buffs share favorites
Movie Reviews — Our critics' picks and pans
Musician Interviews — Up close with local artists
Neighborhood News from Stringers — Hyperlocal news
News Ticker — News & politics
Obermeyer — San Diego politics illustrated
Outdoors — Weekly changes in flora and fauna
Overheard in San Diego — Eavesdropping illustrated
Poetry — The old and the new
Reader Travel — Travel section built by travelers
Reading — The hunt for intellectuals
Roam-O-Rama — SoCal's best hiking/biking trails
San Diego Beer — Inside San Diego suds
SD on the QT — Almost factual news
Sheep and Goats — Places of worship
Special Issues — The best of
Street Style — San Diego streets have style
Surf Diego — Real stories from those braving the waves
Theater — On stage in San Diego this week
Tin Fork — Silver spoon alternative
Under the Radar — Matt Potter's undercover work
Unforgettable — Long-ago San Diego
Unreal Estate — San Diego's priciest pads
Your Week — Daily event picks
Union Kitchen & Tap
Classic example of over promise, under deliver. Pretty place, great location, ho-hum food which does not live up to the hype or the history. Maybe once it did when the original owners who hail from Brusi and Calabria were doing the cooking...but too many pre-packaged restaurant supply items being passed off as "authentic Italian cuisine," in my opinion. When you add in the price this becomes a genuine disappointment where you leave shaking your head muttering, "never again." Service, however, was attentive and pleasant. But if you are looking for an authentic food-to-moan-by Italian meal you'd have more luck in my kitchen at 1/3 the price. That, or Stouffers lasagna.— April 20, 2009 5:26 p.m.
Chemtrails Over the Skies at Earthday?
I knew someone, an otherwise intelligent-appearing, articulate, sophisticated senior lady, who insisted that contrails was the way the government spied on us. That these trails somehow picked up conversations and conducted surveillance. Heavy sigh. She even whispered it as though it was a well-known but dangerous fact to posses. So I am one of those who roll their eyes over most anything that smacks of "conspiracy." You indicate that the particulate matter of the contrails has been studied. Since these trails are left at extremely high altitudes, just how is it collected in order to ensure the integrity of the specimen? Further, how do they ensure that no chemical changes occur to the specimen which are the result of the contrail exhaust being exposed to the atmosphere, sunlight, radiation, and other chemicals already present? Why not post a link to some of these studies or research you write about which supports your concern. I'd like to read them.— April 20, 2009 4:58 p.m.
Celebrity Idiots -- The Jamie Fox and Hulk Hogan Edition
My dear Ovod: I have tremendous respect for anyone who speaks more than one language, especially if their second or third language is English. English is very difficult to learn. It is even more impressive when people do this, and their native language uses a different alphabet. So I respect the fact that you have more than one language "under your belt" (an idiomatic gift just for you :), and in this regard I admire your ability, efforts, and sentiments. Do you mind telling me what your native language is? (I love studying different languages, and I'm curious about their history and development, which is why I ask).— April 20, 2009 4:43 p.m.
Junk Talk
Hey Pete78 - you're a real charmer! Betcha all the girls just can't get enough, huh? (Okay, I just poked my tongue all the way through my cheek. Hate when that happens).— April 20, 2009 3:25 p.m.
Big Bottoms
Ms. Grant & Josh: if men gave birth, abortion would be in the Bill of Rights. And, Ms. Grant, don't forget that if anything goes wrong with your kid -from birth through adulthood- it is allllllllllll the Mom's fault. It is a thankless job, 9 times out of 10, but I don't regret my decision to have children (even though my eldest son just told me he's not planning on having children for the very same reason josh tells us Shanon Leder chose not to have them. Frankly, I think that is the ultimate profession of selfishness, but yes at least reproduction has been thought through in such cases). And while I support just about everything you wrote Ms. Grant, I don't think it is aptly directed at josh. I didn't take what he wrote as a slam against women or mothers, more of a complaint against screaming children on an airplane. Perhaps a bit irreverent, but that's what paints the picture and makes it funny...he has "mea culpa'd" enough on this one...— April 20, 2009 3:22 p.m.
Duncan Shepherd Replies to His Critics
Duncan: That was one long snore...but hey thanks for the English lesson and the tour de France! If you truly want to defend yourself, and have it be read, then hire an editor. Two thumbs down, one "dot," or whatever....— April 20, 2009 3:13 p.m.
Big Bottoms
I think the extra snacks are only fair-LOL Josh! I would imagine it would be horribly demoralizing to be told "hey wide load either buy another seat or move on," essentially, in that sensitive caring way that so many airline counter reps use with all that diplomatic customer focused training they receive (yeah, right). But really, the seats we are talking about are 17" wide. We are not talking a lot of wiggle room. I have had the experience of traveling next to someone who smooshed out into my seat and the isle. But frankly, he was far more uncomfortable than I was and a nicer guy I have never met flying hip to hip from SFO to SAN. So why is it this particular airline is narrowing their seat width and simultaneously announcing a new "zero tolerance" rule, essentially, for those over endowed? Mmmmmmm.... no coincidence this is the same airline (United) that has been struggling. Southwest has been enforcing this rule for years (Josh, did you ever watch that show "Airline?)... and no, it is not discrimination, anymore than it is when they charge you more for extra luggage or heavier luggage. (Btw, private entities can discriminate...in general...but here we have some tension with the commerce clause, and federal funding and state actor arguments so let's not go there...plus giving Josh the "tinglies" twice in one night is just plain skanky :). So why, instead of humiliating these people (or in effect doubling the price of their tickets without really saying so in light of the fact that a growing majority of Americans are mooing their way to baggage claim) why not just create a "super sized" section, much like McDonalds has, and charge 1.5 times the going rate for these wider seats? My thoughts are...no one will buy them. I don't know if it is fair or not to enforce this rule... but I'm open to being convinced.— April 18, 2009 4:06 a.m.
Celebrity Idiots -- The Jamie Fox and Hulk Hogan Edition
Ovod: it is a good thing you are not trying to convince anyone, as you wrote. In that, at least you have succeeded. Further, while it is true that magicsfive has a wonderful sense of humor (she laughs at all my jokes after all)...it is also true that the "law" part of my user name is there for a legitimate reason. I gave 25 years of my life to studying and practicing law... I raised a family and built a business too. And I realize that the nuances of the English language sometimes cause controversy when none is intended (I would NOT want to learn English as a second language, it is very difficult to master even for those born in this country), that does not mean that you have the right to be insulting. For that, there really is little excuse. But you're forgiven. :)— April 18, 2009 3:51 a.m.
La Mesa's Magical Oasis...
Suzanne, coming from you-a self-proclaimed "priggish" English teacher :)-I am truly humbled by your thumbs up. Eloquently written by you of course. Thank you, sincerely, as I know your standards are high (I've read how well YOU write) and I am honored to be one of your "favs." Back at ya, girlfriend. :)) Look forward to reading about Fallbrook, another truly lovely San Diego haven.— April 17, 2009 5:43 p.m.
Celebrity Idiots -- The Jamie Fox and Hulk Hogan Edition
Correction: "Surfpuppy619" I thought you were someone else. My mistake; your mistake was entirely in what you wrote. People are "acquitted" all the time for all kinds of reasons...the State's witness fails to appear; the State loses key evidence or it is barred at trial (like a confession saying "yeah I did it" but they can't get it in for evidentiary reasons - not because the guy didn't do it), or just plain bad lawyering. If a complaining witness is intimidated or doesn't want to get involved - case dismissed (do you think a judge dismissing a case means the person is innocent too? Same result; same presumption of innocence!). And I wish I had a nickle for every time a jury comes back saying "well, we thought he or she did it, but the State didn't prove it"...which makes no sense because obviously, on some level they did. Jurors misunderstand not only jury instructions about how to interpret the law, but also just what constitutes "reasonable doubt." Lawyers and judges misunderstand it too...and there is no one, clear, definition. So people are acquitted allllllll the time for reasons that have NOTHING to do with their guilt or innocence. Think about it for a minute...ah, then the dawn. You are confusing the presumption of innocence with the burden of proof. Two very different things. The system was set up that way, as Blackstone put it, because it is preferable to let 99 guilty men go free than to convict 1 innocent man. But that don't make those 99 guilty men suddenly innocent - the presumption of innocence is just that: a presumption. Look it up and engage brain before engaging blog.— April 17, 2009 5:39 p.m.