SANTA BARBARA RANTING

There were just so many Santa Barbara related topics to discuss last week that I decided to sum them all up in one entry ...
________________

On Thursday, there was a short article on the Santa Barbara Independent web site about developer Jerry Beaver and his desire to seek donations to help make up for the $35,000 he spent fighting the Light Blue Line project. Maybe I'm overreacting a little here, but this really chaps my hide. The Light Blue Line was a nice little endeavor with the sole purpose of bringing awareness to the very real threat of global warming. The fact that a small group of vocal opponents was able to kill this project was a sad day for my town and makes Santa Barbara look pretty lame in the eyes of other more progressive cities who will take this enlightened action.

So, now we're so supposed to feel bad that some rich developer wants his money back? No one asked you to spend your money to fight this fight, Mr. Beaver. If you didn't want to pay the piper, you should have kept your feelings (and your dollars) to yourself. As much as I despise Wendy McCaw, I doubt you'll see her looking for handouts to pay for the legal fees she's incurred fighting the union, Jerry Roberts, the NJR, the former NP employees, the businesses that posted signs, everyone who's worked on her house, people who want to walk on the beach, bloggers ... Ow, I think I'm getting carpel tunnel. Anyway, Mr. Beaver, if you do get 35K in donations, will you make a pledge give it to the people who's houses are under water when SB is swallowed by the sea?
__________________

On the front page of Thursday's Santa Barbara News-Press was the headline "ROOT OF THE PROBLEM - Removal of El Paseo eucalyptus spurs controversy over protection of landmarks." Was I the only one that had that "deja vu all over again" feeling upon reading that? Since Wendy is now famous for being enraged by the removal of trees and then pointing to Travis Armstrong as proof of a community-wide outrage, I can't help but ask if that is what is happening here. I know that El Paseo is a local landmark, and you're not supposed to make changes without permission. But the question I'm asking is if "locals are really upset" about the tree itself? Can anybody help me out here? Are people other than the NP editorial section really angry by this? Inquiring minds want to know.
__________________

Apparently I wasn't the only one who didn't like the Daily Sound's Conservative Turtle debut. Reader Kevin McDaniels had the audacity to write a letter to the Sound stating that he wasn't so happy with their portrayal of liberals. So, the Turtle decided to spend its entire second column (on Thursday) tearing apart Mr. McDaniels's statements. Is this what we get to expect from the new column: Turtle makes outrageous statements about progressives, someone writes a letter calling Turtle on it, and then Turtle picks apart letter? If you feel the need to spend an entire column responding to one negative letter, I think you need a thicker shell.

I will give the Turtle credit for one thing, though ... they actually discussed an issue in this one instead of simply taking pot shots at the left. Specifically, they talked about Das Williams's efforts to convert city vehicles to run on biofeuls. You'll be surprised to hear that I actually agreed with many of their statements about this up and coming fuel source. But then they quickly lost me again by going on a tirade against compassion and tolerance, frequently linking those traits to Nazism. After that, the Turtle -- once again -- went back to the "poor me" stuff ...

We fear the effects of their [progressive liberalism] attacks on traditional institutions such as a biologically related family (based on marriage and procreation between a man and a woman), attacks on religion, attacks on our culture by those from other cultures, and the undermining attacks on the military.

Why don't you stop making these high level vagaries and give specifics? For example, what attacks on religion have I made? Are you talking about the fact that religion is often used to justify homophobia (as you've done here)? If so, then yes, I attack religion in that case. And how have we attacked the military exactly? Democrats want to give the military body armor, better health care, and more time at home with their families (your side just fought and defeated that last one, by the way). Being against Bush and against the Iraq war is not attacking the military.


You state you want a constructive confrontation ... then start talking about something of substance.

Sincerely,

The Liberal Rabbit

THE LIBERAL RABBIT

Let me preface this blog entry by stating that I, as much as anyone, have been an emphatic proponent of The Santa Barbara Daily Sound since its inception. And it goes without saying that they have been a breath of fresh air in a city suffering from the putrid stench of The Santa Barbara News-Press. Thus, it is with this in mind, that I've so far held my tongue on an issue that I -- and others in the blog community -- have noticed over the last few months ... What's with all the conservative commentators?

In last Tuesday's edition, a new column debuted titled The Conservative Turtle that finally gave me that "enough is enough" feeling in the pit of my stomach. This new addition to The Sound is apparently written by a collection of SB conservatives led by a man named Aaron Shaw, and boy are they a depressed bunch of sad sacks. For a group who's ideology is all about being tough, I've never read so much "woe is me" babble in my life. I'd like to go through paragraph by paragraph and respond to each comment, but I think that would give me heartburn. Instead, I'll pick out a few of my favorites ...

Those few [Conservative Turtles] that do remain have mostly been rounded up by the outspoken liberal and progressive activists and placed in a pond ... in an attempt to contain and control yet another endangered species.

And then there's this ...

But we have been afraid. The world has become a dangerous place for turtles ... We fear someone from another culture will pluck us form our pond and maul and torture us ...

And this is nice ...

We dream of a ... city where we can actually speak the truth ... without the filter of the barking liberal media and specter of political correctness, with its associated character assassinations.

You mean like wearing Band-Aids with purple hearts on them to signify John Kerry didn't really get hurt all that bad in Vietnam? Anyway, one more ...

We will no longer be intimidated. We will no longer be inhibited when our words are twisted by the slanderous name-calling left.

Wow, how horrible it must be for you to live in our little town by the sea. I mean, if I controlled all branches of government over the last six years, I'd be ecstatic. But I guess that's just me. You've covered a lot of ground here for such a slow moving animal, but like turtles, you've said very little. It may sound a little cliche, but "where's the beef!" Being a proud and vocal liberal, I could take exception to the many "slanderous name-calling" statements you've produced in this column, but I won't. Instead, Mr. Turtle, I'd like to ask you a few questions ...

1) Do you think Bush did a heck of a job with Katrina?
2) Do you believe Iraq was at all involved in 9/11?
3) Do you believe there should be a constitutional amendment banning gay marriage?
4) Do you believe the "vast majority" of Bush's tax cut went to the lower and middle class?
5) Do you think Ann Coulter was right when she said the 9/11 widows are "enjoying their husband's deaths?"
6) Do you believe in global warming?
7) Do you believe in evolution?
8) Do you believe that stem cell research has the potential to save lives?
9) Do you believe we're winning in Iraq?
10) Is Bush a great president or the greatest president?

These, Mr. Turtle, are the values that this barking liberal wants to discuss. Don't hide in your shell; you need not fear me ... unless, of course, you fear my ideas. So, what say you?

Okay, Mr. Jeramy Gordon, now a couple questions for you ... Are you simply a big champion of The First Amendment as everyone has been saying, or are you a conservative who feels the media leans left and wants to rectify it in his paper? Should I be worried that the wall separating news and opinion will start to chip away at some point? I'm not going to get on my soapbox and suggest people stop reading your paper, but I'm also not too interested in the voices of Santa Barbara becoming Robert Novak, John Stossel, Dr. Laura, Travis Armstrong, and The Conservative Turtle. So, how about a real progressive voice in your paper? And I'm not talking about a slightly left of center, Alan Colmes-like liberal. No, I mean a true progressive sound.

If you have trouble finding someone, give me a ring.