hysterical greens, public-employee lackeys, and Neanderthal Republicans" turning our state into a Banana Republic while the middle-class flows outward and a largely Latino underclass takes its place;
inclination toward self-absorption. ... That's especially true of the Bay
Area -- ground zero for California narcissism."
Narcissistic politics led to calamaties like Props. 13 and 187 and
continues to fuel misanthropic, self-serving endeavors in environmentalism;
It seems Berkeley's skirt-lifting bandit and San Francisco's Outhouse Arsonist are locked in a competition to decide once and for all who is the Bay Area's Napoleon of Ridiculous Yet Disturbing Crimes.
Meanwhile, due to the sexual nature of Berkeley's serial predator, these well-meaning -- but horribly worded -- signs for guide dogs for sale at The Lighthouse for the Blind in San Francisco have grown even more ridiculous. So, if you see a dog (or a person) wearing these signs -- obey them.
This week Supervisor Michela Alioto-Pier made a proposal that San Francisco "adopt the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child and supporting its inalienable freedoms for children and youth in San Francisco."
The proposal, which includes stirring language about how "Children and youth are unique and invaluable to the human race as the continuum of our existence and livelihood" also specifically notes that a child is NOT a "harlequin object."
A what?
I'm familiar with Harlequin (the character from the Italian Commedia del'Arte) and Harlequin (the line of romance novels) ... but a "harlequin object"? I have no idea what that means.
So I called Alioto-Pier's staff and asked them to explain it to me. After a few minutes on hold, I was told they'd need to get back to me on that.
Meanwhile, a Google search turned up zilch.
Far be it from me to suggest that a supervisor put language she doesn't understand -- or that might not even be real -- into a proposed law, but while we're waiting for her office to explain itself, SF Weekly has decided that maybe the people should step in and help.
So here's your chance: DEFINE A "HARLEQUIN OBJECT" in the comments section below, and explain how Alioto-Pier is right to say that a child isn't one.
The best entry, as chosen by me and SF Weekly's online news editor, Joe Eskenazi, will win ... a Harlequin Object! (laws permitting). So name your own prize!
Photo of Pablo Picasso painting | Free ParkingIn a nutshell, here's what the bill would do: "Remove all penalties under California law for the cultivation, transportation, sale, purchase, possession, and use of marijuana, natural THC and paraphernalia by persons over the age of 21," "prohibit local and state law enforcement officials from enforcing federal marijuana laws (more on that later)" and establish a fee of $50 an ounce on marijuana on top of whatever pot will cost in a legal future -- which legalization advocates say is about half what it costs now. This tax rate figures at about a buck a joint.
Betty Yee, the chairwoman of the Board of Equalization, called Ammiano's proposal "a responsible measure on how to work out the regulatory framework of the legalization of marijuana." Her board's research indicated $1.3 billion in tax dollars could immediately head into the state's coffers from the fee on marijuana and the sales tax on medical pot. She figured the halving of marijuana's street price would cause a consumption increase of 40 percent, but the $50 per ounce levy would cut use by 11 percent.
Steve Gutwillig, the state director of Drug Policy Alliance, noted that regulatory measures like Ammiano's bill can work: Teen smoking is way down, and he claims juveniles report it is easier to obtain marijuana than purchase smokes. "Marijuana arrests actually increased 18 percent in California in 2007 while all other arrests for controlled substances fell," he said. "This costs the state a billion dollars a year and taxpayers are footing the bill. Meanwhile, black marketers are laughing all the way to the bank."
But the morning's most forceful speaker was Judge James P. Gray, who retired from his 25-year post on the Orange County Superior Court six weeks ago. With his gray suit, tasseled loafers, and conservative salt-and-pepper haircut, he looked like central casting's offering for "Republican candidate for higher office." Not surprisingly, Gray did run as a Republican for Congress against Bob Dornan and Loretta Sanchez and Senate vs. Bill Jones and Barbara Boxer. He now says he's "not a politician -- and I have the votes to prove it."
"I served 25 years on the bench and I've seen the results of this attempted prohibition. It doesn't make marijuana less available, but it does clog the court system," he said.
