Home > Uncategorized > Nothing to See Here!

Nothing to See Here!

Eureka's Times-Standard.
Lower quality, every day!

Update: The urgency ordinance was passed by the necessary 4-1 with Supervisor Lovelace voting no.

The Humboldt County Board of Supervisors will consider an urgency ordinance “to Address Health and Safety Issues at the Humboldt County Courthouse” at its meeting today, starting at 9 AM.

The ordinance would make it a violation of the law to be on the grounds of the Courthouse from 9:30 PM to 6 AM. It would also make it illegal to affix signs to County property or to run string across County property. Being in response to a purported “urgency,” the ordinance would take effect immediately if passed by four of the five Supervisors.

The front page of this morning’s local sad-excuse-for-a-newspaper reminds the public of this sure-to-be-controversial event with the following, quoted in full:

.
.
.

Crickets.

The sad-excuse-for-a-newspaper does have a big picture of a fake car crash taking up much of today’s front page — it just decided not to tell people about today’s real potential car crash on today’s front page.

  1. Riboflavin
    March 27, 2012 at 7:57 am

    True. The antics in front of the courthouse, being so close to the roadway, could cause a car crash. I’m glad to see the supes are finally doing something about this public health risk.

  2. March 27, 2012 at 9:03 am

    So, what if they moved across the street…?

  3. March 27, 2012 at 9:07 am

    PS,
    With the appalling vote on medical cannabis, and this debacle, my supervisor pretty much just lost my vote.

    Sorry Mr. Lovelace, Ms Brooks looks like she might just get my vote this time.

  4. jackdurham
    March 27, 2012 at 9:17 am

    See the March 26, March 21 and March 18 editions of the T-S for articles about this issue.

  5. Anonymous
    March 27, 2012 at 9:29 am

    Do you think Ms. Brooks would have voted more to your liking on these issues, Mark? Isn’t that a bit like supporting Santorum because Obama isn’t far enough left for you?

  6. Anonymous
    March 27, 2012 at 9:30 am

    As a retired Humboldt County Building Custodian , I am wondering how much time that Custodians have had to spend cleaning up messes that did not exist very often prior to the occupation at the Courthouse . I know for a fact that there are not very many custodians to clean the inside of the Courthouse . I am also wondering how much more money has had to be spent on bathroom supplies with the increased use of the bathrooms .

  7. High Finance
    March 27, 2012 at 9:57 am

    Any of you watching the slide show on Channel 10 ?

    It shows the amazing mess and debris the “protestors” made before the chain link fence.

    Be warned, it isn’t easy to watch unless you have a strong stomach.

  8. March 27, 2012 at 10:08 am

    Public comment is about to start. The slide show Included poop inside and out of the courthouse.

  9. March 27, 2012 at 10:26 am

    Six speakers so far, all opposed to the urgency ordinance.

  10. Anonymous
    March 27, 2012 at 10:34 am

    Kimberly Wear is only part of the problem at the TS, but she is a significant problem. As the managing editor, she has reigned over the continuing slide in journalistic integrity. Not that the TS has ever been that good.

    Note to Kim: A newspaper is supposed to be objective and report all sides of a story. Your job is to learn about important issues and keep the community informed without showing attitude or taking sides. It is a mark of professionalism to honestly explain the position of someone you disagree with. We have seen plenty of the opposite from you.

    Kimberly is better suited to running a preschool than a newspaper.

  11. March 27, 2012 at 10:38 am

    Speakers blame the supes and police for disallowing portapotties and raiding Occupy Eureka for bringing the situation in front of the courthouse to its current state.

  12. March 27, 2012 at 10:39 am

    10 speakers so far, all opposed.

  13. March 27, 2012 at 10:42 am

    A group of 7th graders have front row seats to this discussion in the Board of Supervisors chambers today.

  14. tra
    March 27, 2012 at 10:45 am

    FYI,

    The Lost Coast Outpost provided a link where folks can watch this meeting live at:

    http://humboldt.granicus.com/MediaPlayer.php?publish_id=2

  15. March 27, 2012 at 10:53 am

    15 speakers, all opposed.

  16. March 27, 2012 at 10:58 am

    It’s pretty gripping testimony so far, I wonder if the video will go viral. It really resonates with the national debate.

    have a peaceful day,
    Bill

  17. Chicken Little
    March 27, 2012 at 11:01 am

    The sky is falling!

  18. Granicus
    March 27, 2012 at 11:04 am

    It was fun to see Virginia Bass go fishin for some supporters to speak in favor of this turkey, she did it two or three times. FAIL!

    They are in recess now, they are either figuring out how to save face, bus in some supporters or they are using a lifeline.

  19. tra
    March 27, 2012 at 11:14 am

    What the hell was that woman Linda driving at? Sounded like some kind of “sovereign citizen” rant.

  20. Dan
    March 27, 2012 at 11:17 am

    Thanks Heraldo,
    thanks Lost Coast Outpost.

  21. March 27, 2012 at 11:19 am

    Let them stay – the PERFECT illustration of “Progressive” Politics end result.

    Lawlessness, using Free Speech as a cover.

    This is your society. This is your society on “Progressive” Lord-Of-The-Flies drugs.

    Love it.

  22. March 27, 2012 at 11:22 am

    Rose is still the voice of the simpletons.

    21 speakers so far, all opposed.

  23. tra
    March 27, 2012 at 11:27 am

    A speaker just said that there are more than 1,600 documented homeless people in Eureka.

    Think about that. And the Board of Supervisors is proposing to pass this “urgency” ordinance, which would restrict protesters’ rights, just because a handful of these homeless people (including some who clearly have mental health issues) are causing some problems at the courthouse? Ridiculous.

  24. tra
    March 27, 2012 at 11:30 am

    Women in Black participant describes two incidents where three police cars swooped in to force them to take down their peace sign.

  25. tra
    March 27, 2012 at 11:34 am

    James Decker tells the Supervisors that the analysis of the fiscal impact of this proposed ordinance is “kind of a joke.” Reminds Supervisors how much a lawsuit could end up costing the County. I interpreted that as a not-too-subtle warning which echoes Jannelle Egger’s closing comment earlier, where she referred to “getting a lawyer.”

  26. tra
    March 27, 2012 at 11:37 am

    Just heard the first speaker (I think her name was Juile) who supported the idea of passing some kind of ordinance, though she was pretty vague about what she wanted.

  27. March 27, 2012 at 11:39 am

    Janelle also said she was told by the DA (or some other official in the courthouse) to get a lawyer, but the ordinance is quickly being pushed through before protesters can reasonably make that happen.

  28. tra
    March 27, 2012 at 11:42 am

    Another speaker kinda-sorta for doing, well, something or other. Signs on the fence are fine. Poop in the hallway is not.

    (Of course pooping in the hallway is already against the law…)

  29. tra
    March 27, 2012 at 11:47 am

    11:42 This guy Christopher from Fortuna is hitting some important points. Quite eloquent and down to earth.

  30. March 27, 2012 at 11:50 am

    2 for, 31 against so for.

  31. tra
    March 27, 2012 at 11:50 am

    Guy from McKinleyville said his main problem with those gathered in front of the Courthouse is getting panhandled as me makes his way in and out of the building.

  32. tra
    March 27, 2012 at 11:54 am

    I think the guy from McKinleyville, who doesn’t like to be panhandled, makes it 3 for the ordinance. Though it’s hard to be confident about the numbers, because a couple of the “for” folks were very vague. Some of the “against” folks have been kind of vague and rambling in their remarks, but at least it was clear that they were “against.”

  33. Dudley
    March 27, 2012 at 11:58 am

    Popular doesn’t make it right, H.

  34. Anonymous
    March 27, 2012 at 12:01 pm

    Hey I got a great idea! Let’s make it illegal to do something that has never been illegal before so that we can stop having to look at people who protest the escalating decline of our nation! When it’s illegal, police forces will be “allowed” to beat the tar out of protesters and throw their lives into more financial chaos than the decline of our nation is already doing, with or without protest!

  35. labtech
    March 27, 2012 at 12:02 pm

    Rose is right, Heraldo. You are not advocating for free speech and assembly but for chaos and filth.

  36. tra
    March 27, 2012 at 12:03 pm

    Greg Allen: The only really new thing this ordinance does is the nighttime ban. Refers to earlier comments on candlelight vigils. All the other stuff like no public urinination or defecation is already against the law.

    There is no emergency. I’ve sent a copy of this ordinance to ACLU “braintrust.” Don’t want to see a lawsuit…it wouldn’t come from me, but it might come. Don’t pass this today, take the time to avoid legal problems later. ACLU would be happy to work with County Counsel.

  37. Anonymous
    March 27, 2012 at 12:06 pm

    Hey I’ve got a great idea! Let’s bury ourselves in some more beaurocracy! Let’s make it illegal to do something that’s never been illegal before, just so that the police can be “allowed” to beat the tar out of specific people and throw their lives into even more financial chaos than the escalating decline of our nation is already doing, with or without protest!

  38. BiPlane
    March 27, 2012 at 12:10 pm

    Majority rule?

  39. Anonymous
    March 27, 2012 at 12:11 pm

    testing post, wtf…will I see this? count me as another vote against.

  40. tra
    March 27, 2012 at 12:14 pm

    Verbena: It doesn’t matter whether people are made “uncomfortable” by protests, people have a right to protest, not a right to be comfortable. Some of the pictures of the “mess” in the slideshow were pictures the mess that the police made when they raided the Occupy encampment in the fall. You Supervisors are trying to cram this through as an “emergency” ordinance…and in the ordinance for some reason you claim the “emergency” started in Janaury, not sure why this is, since the protest started last fall, some of the pictures in the slideshow were from the fall. I guess you didn’t want to admit that the situation has been under way for so many months, because this makes the attempt to suddenly declare it an emergency seem ridiculous, as it is.

  41. tra
    March 27, 2012 at 12:17 pm

    Sherriff Downey: The Occupy people are taking away other peoples’ freedoms. Warns of “mob rule” and “intimidation” by “people who have gained power.”

  42. March 27, 2012 at 12:17 pm

    Some speakers were vague but the public comment numbers are something akin to:

    4 for
    36 against
    1 no opinion

    Now we have the sheriff and Eureka police chief Murl Harpham who says he hasn’t read it but supports it anyway.

  43. Dudley
    March 27, 2012 at 12:20 pm

    So, the winner by popular vote is….?

  44. grrrrrimmm
    March 27, 2012 at 12:22 pm

    OMG Our moron Chief Murl Harpham hasn’t read the ordinance but supports it anyway! On video!
    OMG Our moron Chief Murl Harpham hasn’t read the ordinance but supports it anyway! On video!
    OMG Our moron Chief Murl Harpham hasn’t read the ordinance but supports it anyway! On video!
    OMG Our moron Chief Murl Harpham hasn’t read the ordinance but supports it anyway! On video!

  45. Dudley
    March 27, 2012 at 12:24 pm

    Kelly Neel for District Attorney

  46. tra
    March 27, 2012 at 12:25 pm

    Murl Harpham:

    I haven’t read the ordinance, didn’t have time.

    If I thought it would do anything to reduce freedom of speech, I’d be against it. I used to teach the First Amendment at College of the Redwoods, so I know how important it is and would never do anything to stifle freedom of speech.

    Though I haven’t read the ordinance, I’m sure I can support it, because with all the lawyers you have I’m sure you wouldn’t do anything that would stifle freedom of speech.

    But even if you pass this ordinance, don’t get your hopes up. Lack of prosecution by the District Attorney is the problem.

    That’s why we (EPD) stopped enforcing the law there, in February.

    I guess I’ve said enough.

  47. Dudley
    March 27, 2012 at 12:27 pm

    “We have to pass the bill to see what’s in it.” Heard that before somewhere. Anyone?

  48. Anonymous
    March 27, 2012 at 12:29 pm

    “That’s why we (EPD) stopped enforcing the law there, in February.”

    Murl should be fired immediately!

  49. Plain Jane
    March 27, 2012 at 12:30 pm

    “That’s why we (EPD) stopped enforcing the law there, in February.”

    Murl should be fired immediately!

  50. Dudley
    March 27, 2012 at 12:32 pm

    He’s being used as a place-holder until the city unveils its new chief. He’s got nothing to lose by expressing his unsavory views.

  51. Anonymous
    March 27, 2012 at 12:37 pm

    The reason all the speakers are opposed is because those of us in agreement are all at work.

  52. tra
    March 27, 2012 at 12:39 pm

    In other words, Murl is saying that he flat-out refuses to do his job, because he doesn’t like the way the DA is doing his job.

    Same as when Downey threw his little tantrum because someone didn’t “respek mah authorituh” about a sign on the fence and sent the DA a pissy little e-mail announcing that he was therefore “suspending all efforts” to deal with the “assaults on the public”

    That’s an, uh, interesting approach to fulfilling their duties.

  53. High Finance
    March 27, 2012 at 12:41 pm

    The number who speak for or against it is irrelevant. The left always has more speakers out. The conservatives are at work. Other conservatives are intimidated by the unfriendly crowd. Even that big guy who spoke out in favor of the ordinance was laughed at by opponents.

    Virginia asked the crowd several times to be quiet and respectful. Her requests were not necessary for the supporters.

    Anyone who thinks this ordinance is not popular with most Eurekans simply are totally out of touch with Eureka.

  54. Plain Jane
    March 27, 2012 at 12:46 pm

    Civil rights aren’t subject to popularity contests.

  55. FD&C Red
    March 27, 2012 at 12:53 pm

    Civil rights aren’t subject to popularity contests.

    Why, then, is Heraldo counting hands?

  56. High Finance
    March 27, 2012 at 12:54 pm

    “We do have authority to reasonably regulate time, place and manner”.

    “One of the Occupiers said I am here to gaurantee his rights. No, I am here to gaurantee everybody’s rights”.

    Mark Lovelace a few minutes ago put the issue distinctly.

    Now if he can only show a backbone and follow up by voting for the ordinance.

  57. March 27, 2012 at 12:55 pm

    They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary\\\

    safety deserve neither liberty nor safety==Benjamin Franklin

  58. Plain Jane
    March 27, 2012 at 12:56 pm

    Political decisions are often subject to popularity contests.

  59. FD&C Red
    March 27, 2012 at 12:58 pm

    Tyranny of the majority

  60. tra
    March 27, 2012 at 1:02 pm

    Lovelace indicates that he doesn’t support the ordinance in its entirety, might be willing to move forward with a couple of the elements of it.

    Ends by saying that during public comment people hurt his feelings by portraying him as the enemy, referring to the Supes as dictators and whatnot. Ends by joking that the one that really hurt his feelings was the suggestion that he went home and watched Fox News.

  61. tra
    March 27, 2012 at 1:11 pm

    The ordinance passed, 4-1, only Lovelace against. Lovelace tries to make some additional comments, but a couple of people in the crowd yell “mic check.” Bass adjourns the meeting for lunch.

  62. Anonymous
    March 27, 2012 at 1:17 pm

    I’m at work and I’m opposed.

  63. Anonymous
    March 27, 2012 at 1:33 pm

    Awesome! Cooler heads have prevailed!

  64. tra
    March 27, 2012 at 1:41 pm

    So, given that this “urgency ordinance” takes effect immediately, it seems that just a couple of minutes ago it suddenly became “illegal” to have a candlelight vigil, or any other kind of protest after 9:30 at night, on the courthouse grounds. The four Supervisors who voted for this tonight just voted an outright ban on a traditional form of freedom of speech and freedom of assembly that has been practiced by countless Americans for hundreds of years, and by other human beings long before that.

    They justified this by pointing to various nuisances, most unrelated to the issue of night-time protests/vigils. And the most serious of which could have been addressed with existing laws, if we didn’t have a police chief and sherriff who have publicly refused to enforce those existing laws in a (successful) attempt to pressure the Board to hurry this new emergency law through.

  65. tra
    March 27, 2012 at 1:53 pm

    I don’t know how all this is going to play out, but the two predictions I’m willing to make are that (1) this emergency ordinance is not going to solve the problems that were used to justify its passage, and (2) passage of this ordinance is going to create a bunch of new problems, and will probably end up costing the county a whole lot more money than it will save.

  66. High Finance
    March 27, 2012 at 1:55 pm

    Silly alarmist speak.

    Virginia did say that they will be working on a more permanent ordinance in the next few months. I am sure the “candlelight vigil” type issue will be addressed.

  67. March 27, 2012 at 1:57 pm

    “The left always has more speakers out. The conservatives are at work.”

    That’s the sort of horse-shit the right-wing blowhards have always said about protestors. I doubt that HiFi has ever generated an original thought, and this time is no exception.

  68. alley
    March 27, 2012 at 2:13 pm

    I am at work and I am against the ordinance.

  69. RefFan
    March 27, 2012 at 2:17 pm

    horse-shit, blowhards, original thought; That all you got Joel? Now that was original!!LOL. This is not a Relay-For-Life benefit so there is no reason why anyone needs to be out there after dark, 24/7.

  70. Mark Sailors
    March 27, 2012 at 2:18 pm

    Looks like Mr. Lovelace just got my vote back.

    Shame on the rest Of the supervisors. Our founding fathers are all spinning in thIer respective graves.

    How do you think Thomas Paine would have reacted to this? What about George Washington?

  71. March 27, 2012 at 2:55 pm

    I’m thinking that this is a case of a cup half full – and a cup half empty.

    Protestors can still do their thing from 6 a.m. to 9:30 p.m. Daylight hours for protests will reach more people (visability really helps) than night protests (not in all cases – but generally).

    On the other hand, banning night protests appears to be nothing more than a ploy to restrict protestors rights to get their message out nearly half of each day.

    The part about not sticking signs in the grass can be easily solved – people can just hold them and respect public property by not destroying it.

    I frankly find it amusing how both conservatives and liberals are responding to this issue. If both sides could stop protecting their brand long enough, they’d see compromise is possible.

    Instead, rhethoric rides through comment threads like one of the four horseman of the apocalypse…

  72. March 27, 2012 at 3:04 pm

    “Looks like Mr. Lovelace just got my vote back.”

    Sheesh Mark, the whole board is made up of Quislings,
    Lovelace the worst, in that he was to give the ‘progressive’
    thoughtful long-term view of the situation. It was clear that he himself did not ‘know’ his position.
    Maybe we could sponsor history classes for the BOS?
    Maybe civics?
    And Harpham, “Haven’t read it”
    “I support it” that’s another story.

  73. tra
    March 27, 2012 at 3:14 pm

    So they’re enacting a complete ban on this venerable form of freedom of speech and freedom of assembly, but that’s somehow more acceeptable because they said that maybe they might change their minds and allow it in the future, if and when they get around to it?

    In other words there’s no need to be “alarmed,” since although your right to assemble peaceably and engage in free speech in the form of a candlelight vigil has just been removed with the stroke of a pen, that right might restored at a some point a few months down the line.

  74. Mitch
    March 27, 2012 at 3:16 pm

    Wow. If the Times-Standard wasn’t already in the running for worst newspaper in America, support from Jack (“nobody told me!”) Durham ought to get them the nomination.

  75. jackdurham
    March 27, 2012 at 4:04 pm

    Poor Mitch. Boring, predictable and misinformed.

  76. Jim White
    March 27, 2012 at 4:05 pm

    “We do have authority to reasonably regulate time, place and manner”.

    NOT IN THIS CASE!

    According to long-standing Supreme court rulings, the “Time, Place, Manner Doctrine” must be soundly based upon “CLEAR threats to health and safety”, “UNREASONABLE interference to other activities and individuals”, “to protect SIGNIFICANT government interests.”

    Existing evidence against the OE protesters would qualify much of the City of Eureka for a similar, illegal curfew.

    Inquiries and funds are already being raised to defend the U.S. Constitution against these 4, poorly informed supervisors who, apparently, don’t take their oath of office seriously.

  77. Amy Breighton
    March 27, 2012 at 4:17 pm

    Sorry Jim, you’re not going to deprive one Reich-Winger here of his joy that our (otherwise) over-paid bureaucrats, pumping out more evil regulations nobody reads, with all the reality on Earth.

    Even a local judge will, likely, reaffirm the Supreme Court rulings on this issue, followed by the timeless whining of petty tyrants.

  78. Anonymous
    March 27, 2012 at 4:22 pm

    Jack Durham said:

    Poor Mitch. Boring, predictable, and misinformed.

    Yeah, Mitch, cut it out. If people are looking for boring, predictable and misinformed they can just pick up a copy of the McKinleyville Press.

  79. What Now
    March 27, 2012 at 4:26 pm

    Did they pass an eglish language version of “Der Diktat” or did they simply photocopy and pass in the original 1934 German “legalise”?

  80. High Finance
    March 27, 2012 at 4:27 pm

    Geez Joel, WTF ? Had a bad day ?

    Yeah right Stancliff. Try to think instead of react. How many people got their message driving by in the dark at midnight ?

    This is just to get these people out of making the Courthouse their permanent home. But you are right in that nobody has stopped them from their “protests” but just put a very reasonable limit on them.

  81. March 27, 2012 at 4:43 pm

    Let’s see if I get what your putting down High Finance:

    You mock me for “reacting” to what? (I said half full, half empty) and acting like I don’t realize night protests aren’t effective….

    Then, you turn around and say I’m right about putting reasonable time limits on them at night.

    Try reading my original comment one more time, because you sound confused to me.
    Especially note the part about partisan rhetoric…

  82. High Finance
    March 27, 2012 at 5:45 pm

    Dave, maybe you should read MY comment one more time.

    It is not you that I “mocked”. I mocked those who claim that the occupiers were really protesting at midnight when nobody could see them in the dark.

    Don’t fool yourself into thinking you’re not partisan yourself.

  83. Roots
    March 27, 2012 at 5:47 pm

    There are more than 1,600 documented homeless people in Eureka.

    And no one suggests the need or urgent action to alleviate this situation?

    this emergency ordinance is not going to solve the problems that were used to justify its passage

    duh. see above

    High Finance:…you sound confused to me.

    That is huge a understatement. Quite charitable, considering…

  84. Roots
    March 27, 2012 at 5:54 pm

    make that: a huge understatement.

    and: there is the need for urgent action

    typos aside, why no great alarm about the 1,600+ homeless people from the good citizens of Eureka? /Their only concern is for their own comfort.

    Praise Jesus. The “moral majority”, exposed again.

  85. March 27, 2012 at 6:19 pm

    “Our founding fathers are all spinning in thIer respective graves.”

    Looks like Mark Sailors has been attending Rose’s needless hyperbole classes.

  86. High Finance
    March 27, 2012 at 6:28 pm

    “1,600 documente homeless people in Eureka”

    Nice fodder for the liberals to try & get us to spend even more money on those people.

    Anyone interested in the definition used by that self-serving group who did the “study” ?

  87. Anonymous
    March 27, 2012 at 6:48 pm

    Wait, aren’t you the guy who is always complaining about how Eureka is overrun with hundreds and hundreds of homeless people? But now that someone has cited a figure that would seem to back up that view, you’ve swithched to complaining that “liberals” are inflating the figures and exaggerating the homelessness problem?

  88. High Finance
    March 27, 2012 at 7:06 pm

    Nice try 6.48pm.

    No wait. It was a insipid try.

    There are many, just not anywhere even close to 1,600 homeless as most people understand the definition. But yes there are too many and their numbers are growing attracted to this area by the lax law enforcement, mild weather and all the freebies.

  89. Anonymous
    March 27, 2012 at 7:16 pm

    So, what’s your estimate of the number of homeless people in Eureka, and what is that estimate based on?

  90. Dudley
    March 27, 2012 at 9:09 pm

    Want to address the issue of 1600 homeless in Eureka? Move the county seat to another town. They’ll follow the checks.

  91. March 27, 2012 at 10:13 pm

    “It was a insipid try”?

  92. March 28, 2012 at 7:48 am

    Well folks, here come the multi million dollar lawsuits. The kid that was beaten by the police at OE had his criminal charges dismissed, and is now using my footage of the event to sue Murl, EPD, and the city of Eureka.
    You have got to expect more court action on this one for sure…

    PS.
    I am not fond of having to pay my taxes in Arcata to have them used to defend and pay for the mistakes and outright criminal behavior by EPD. Maybe its time to separate the insurance policies for the two cities.

  93. March 28, 2012 at 7:52 am

    Government, even in its best state, is but a necessary evil; in its worst state, an intolerable one.
    Thomas Paine

  94. March 28, 2012 at 7:54 am

    To say that any people are not fit for freedom, is to make poverty their choice, and to say they had rather be loaded with taxes than not.
    Thomas Paine

  95. Mitch
    March 28, 2012 at 8:07 am

    After yesterday’s and today’s demonstrations by the Times-Standard, I think if protesters are unable to continue at the Courthouse without arrest, they should move to the Times-Standard offices a block or two away. The paper is just another head of the same hydra.

    I also wish someone would start an independent advertising circular, so that advertisers would have a choice not to spend their money supporting the propaganda rag that is the T-S. As I’ve said in the past, the paper has sunk to the point where NO newspaper would be better than THAT newspaper. I don’t know how Thadeus Greenson can stand it — they can’t be paying him anything close to what he’s worth.

  96. High Finance
    March 28, 2012 at 9:14 am

    From what I can see you may have your wish sooner than you might expect Mitch – no paper.

    The Times Standard (and all papers) are losing more of their classified advertising dollars to Craigs List. Their retail business advertising is down because of the economy.

  97. High Finance
    March 28, 2012 at 9:17 am

    When that group claims there are 1,600 homeless they count as homeless Sally living in her aunt’s spare bedroom. They count people living in motels.

    How many are there for real ? I consider homeless people those living at the Rescue Mission and in the bushes. Are there 300 ? 400 ?

    I don’t know and neither do you.

  98. Mitch
    March 28, 2012 at 9:22 am

    Hi Fi,

    No loss in my opinion.

    It’s worse for people to think they’re informed when they’re really being propagandized than for people to realize they aren’t being informed.

    I’d expect a local advertising circular would emerge in place of Eureka Pravda. It might even call itself a newspaper, and hire a few of the unemployed hacks to write copy so it could pretend to be one.

  99. Anonymous
    March 28, 2012 at 9:44 am

    If the Times Standard improved its reporting and actually delivered a good product that people want to read, maybe they wouldn’t be in financial trouble. Increased circulation might lead to increased advertising dollars.

    The on-line version of the Times Standard has obnoxious and persistent pop-up ads that don’t go away, plastered over the top of the article you are trying to read. Another turn-off. Really stupid.

  100. Anonymous
    March 28, 2012 at 11:06 am

    The supervisors who voted in favor of the ordinance should be thrown under the national spotlight and grilled about their action. They’ve forced unto all of us another pile of paper thrown on the evergrowing mountain of beaurocracy, in blatant contempt of the majority of the people they’re supposed to represent. Their decision to up and pass another law that is in no uncertain terms for a sole political tactic is sickening, and as some have already written, our ancestors are rolling in their graves. This demonstrates more than these specific supervisors’ lack of respect toward the people, but also of what the people are saying in protest to begin with. NONE of them will get my vote regarding anything political evermore. They really blew it with this one.

  101. What Now
    March 28, 2012 at 12:03 pm

    High Finance says:
    March 28, 2012 at 9:17 am

    “How many are there for real ? I consider homeless people those living at the Rescue Mission and in the bushes. Are there 300 ? 400 ? ”

    You math skills and powers of observation have always been skewered, ‘Fried.
    Somehow amidst the fog of your alcohol based courage and through the “vision” of your bullhorn you appeared to have delusions of being Moses when strutting and waddling your bloat at “Goodbye Occupy”.
    Yes, you command legions, “Fried.
    Legions of your own dead brain cells.

  102. High Finance
    March 28, 2012 at 12:25 pm

    Do you ever offer anything of substance What Now ? Must you always post like a frustrated 13 year old ?

  103. What Now
    March 28, 2012 at 12:50 pm

    As long as it deflates YOUR 5 year old ego, I’m having the time of my life, “Fried.
    You’re so goddamned rich and brilliant, make Heraldo an offer and take the site over, you pompous Jackass.

  104. Jim White
    March 28, 2012 at 4:29 pm

    And…what says Hern Highball when you point out that the 2010 Census reported 1,300 homeless in H.Co.?

    “See I was right, it wasn’t 1,600”.?

    This is what you’ll get when you feed a sophist. As if the EXACT number was the argument, all along…. instead of how any “civilized” community, or nation, continues to tolerate divestment from their human resources.

    “This is just to get these people out of making the Courthouse their permanent home.” (High-Sophistry).

    As if ANYONE wants to live on the streets ANYWHERE.

    Pure sophistry.

  105. High Finance
    March 28, 2012 at 4:35 pm

    It is not even close to 1,300 by the definition that most people would use for the word “homeless”.

    It is not “sophistry” to say you are flat out wrong using the 1,600 figure. Sorry to burst your bubble.

  106. Roots
    March 28, 2012 at 6:09 pm

    “the 2010 Census reported 1,300 homeless in H.Co.?”

    That makes the 1600 figure even more credible. The homeless have no phone, no mailbox, no door to knock on. The census always miscounts on the low side, even when counting people with residences.

    Under-counting homeless people, who live cars, in allies and in the bushes is not only plausible, it is a certainty.

    Simple logic, Hi Fi. Logic is not your strong suit, as you and your predecessors have shown many times over the years on this blog. And, I venture to guess, in your own life.

    Remember, you’re the high financier who was surprised when the housing market crashed. You never thought that certainty could happen. What a joke you are!

  107. Quibble
    March 28, 2012 at 6:28 pm

    Mitch @ 8:07:

    I also wish someone would start an independent advertising circular, so that advertisers would have a choice not to spend their money supporting the propaganda rag that is the T-S.

    It’s here already and we call it the NorthCoast Journal. Different propaganda, however.

  108. Anonymous
    March 28, 2012 at 7:45 pm

    Quibble, THANK YOU for that!
    The NC Journal has become just one more waste of resources.

  109. RefFan
    March 29, 2012 at 11:17 am

    The ppl living in motels, relatives & friends’ homes have addresses and phones, in some sense. They might not own or rent their own place but they are not homeless. In a more reasonable and logical sense, homeless ppl are ones living on the streets and in shelters. you ppl are distorting the facts to plz your own agenda. Get a grip on reality, for goodness sakes!

  110. Anonymous
    March 29, 2012 at 11:49 am

    “They might not own or rent their own place but they are not homeless.”

    They absolutely are homeless. Get a grip indeed, you live in a bubble.

  111. Anonymous
    March 29, 2012 at 12:57 pm

    “I don’t know and neither do you.” (High-Hairball 9:17).

    Another rich example of providing this sad person with facts that, astoundingly, merely embolden his belligerent, willful ignorance.

    He is only here to provoke you folks!!

    The 2010 Census organized teams that contacted every local aid, law enforcement and advocacy group to scour every known homeless encampment in Humboldt, Trinity, Del Norte, Lake, and Mendocino counties over many months from their Eureka headquarters.

    “Roots” is absolutely correct.

    The Census notoriously under-counts every category. Ask anyone who worked there. Humboldt County is riddled with many thousands of structures visible on Google satellite not listed on maps.

    County tax assessors could cause an armed rebellion if they investigated and enforced the same property tax laws you and I must follow because many would be made homeless by the tax! Census enumerators frequently discovered folks deeply afraid of being counted…even though Safeway knows far more about them.

    (It wasn’t the pot growers who were armed and angry).

  1. No trackbacks yet.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s