Page 2 of 6
Posted on September 2 at 9:44 a.m.
With only one green item (broccoli) in the description, how, exactely, is this "healthy food"? Pastas and crêpes oozing with Nutella are the kind of carb-based dishes apt to put kids to sleep after lunch.
On Green and Tasty
Posted on August 15 at 8:53 a.m.
While I've heard many negative stories about pet insurance, and don't have insurance for my three pets, I do have one friend whose one-year-old dog required two surgeries costing about $2,000 each, and which were covered by insurance except for the $150 deductible. Since these surgeries happened when the dog was so young, the amount paid so far in premiums was far less than the cost of the surgeries. Presumably over the lifetime of the dog, the owner will pay in premiums more than the cost of the surgeries, but she was happy not to have to shell it out all at once. Since knowing of that experience, I've become open to the idea of insuring a new pet.
On Pet Insurance
Posted on June 24 at 1:44 p.m.
I wish there were a way to get a left turn lane without eliminating other lanes. But the left turn lane seems essential.
On Should Cliff Drive be reduced from 4 lanes to 3?
Posted on April 22 at 3:11 p.m.
I'm not sure it benefits the county to be in one district. With the current districts, we have twice the number of assembly members looking out for Santa Barbara County.
But there's something to be said for the simplicity of a district matching a county.
On Nava Lobbies For Redrawn 35th District to Include Only S.B. County
Posted on December 24 at 9:29 a.m.
Thanks for the sanity, DonMcDermott.
First, earmarks are a very small part of the budget, accounting for somewhere between $17 and $67 billion, depending on what is considered an earmark.
Second, eliminating earmarks doesn't necessarily reduce spending. Many earmarks merely specify how a portion of an allocation is spent. The allocation will be spent even if the earmark is eliminated, but not in the way it was earmarked. In other words, eliminating these earmarks puts power in the hands of bureaucrats rather than elected members of Congress.
Third, earmarks create jobs. Working people pay taxes. Unemployed people are paid with tax dollars. So eliminating earmarks doesn't necessarily save money.
On Capps Loses $13.8 Million in Earmarks
Posted on December 24 at 9:14 a.m.
You know what gets robbed a lot? Banks. Maybe we should get rid of them, because of the danger they pose. Likewise, rich people, who have stuff that burglars want. And it's hard to believe a medical marijuana dispensary could cause more problems than a warehouse store for liquor, so let's get rid of BevMo.
On Pot Shop Approved
Posted on December 3 at 8:57 a.m.
I love my Kindle and I love well-curated local bookstores. I am not excited about Borders or Barnes & Noble, which aside from providing local jobs, merely reproduce the experience of a big corporate website like Amazon. Viva Chaucer's!
And to turnleft: Jane Austen's novels are FREE for the Kindle, a price that even a good used bookstore is unlikely to match. Almost anything out of copyright is free or costs less than a dollar for the Kindle. That may be bad for bookstores, but it's good for people who read.
On Santa Barbara to Books: Drop Dead
Posted on December 1 at 11:50 p.m.
I care, citti; I care. People saying "begs the question" almost always mean "raises the question." When I hear the incorrect use in movies, or used by news anchors, I cringe.
On No Due Process
Posted on October 22 at 8:01 a.m.
Draxor and SezMe seem to be under the impression that the district instituted the lawsuit. Richter brought the suit. The district had no way of knowing he would do so.
I'm not sure how Mr. Richter was harmed. The district didn't fire him. What would the injunction do? Protect him in a future, similar instance?
I agree with MichelleR: practice your religion to your heart's content, but as private citizen rather than a government employee.
On Principal Alleges Religious Discrimination
Posted on October 8 at 7:37 a.m.
I wouldn't be surprised to learn that a significant proportion of respondents answer how they think they "should," rather than what they truly believe, when it comes to issues of the environment.
I agree with those who question the representativeness of a survey that includes only people with landlines who answer calls from unrecognized numbers.
Isn't 3%-4% within the margin of error, so that there's virtually no difference between respondents in the North County and South County? That doesn't make the results less surprising--at least not by much.
Finally, if attitudes toward growth are nearly identical, the obvious question is why has there been so much more growth in the North County? Or is that a misconception as well? One possibility is that the development of the past 10 years has changed attitudes--a tipping point has been reached. Another is that the North County has become filled with former South County people looking for affordable homes, and as that has happened, attitudes there have shifted.
On Reluctant Over Growth