Football hero likes Trump & won’t kneel


Football hero Jim Brown  likes Trump & won’t kneel

Football hero likes Trump & won’t kneel.  Football hall Of fame Jim Brown told “Fox & Friends” Tuesday morning that neither President Donald Trump nor America are racist. When asked if Trump was “a racist,” Brown replied: “I’m glad you asked me that. Of course not. Is America racist? Of course not.”

Brown also encouraged black Americans to stop blaming Trump for the high homicide rate because “it’s the black community that needs to address it…and the black community is not doing what it should do.”


The former NFL star suggested black people need to consider the positive and stop pushing the negative. “How many black athletes are millionaires because of..white fans that ago to those games?” He asked.


Firenze Sage:  It is pretty hard to denigrate football’s greatest running back and civil rights hero Jim Brown  but the carping race baiters were at it full on.

Impeach Trump? How? Another moronic try at impeachment by MSNBC


fake news about impeachment?  stupidity?

Another moronic try at impeachment.

MSNBC used the word impeachment 224 times in 18 hours.

Don’t go to MSNBC for facts on the Constitution. For the second day in a row, the network attempted to explain the process of “how Impeachment works.

” Once again, the cable channel screwed up. MSNBC Livehost Ali Velshi on Thursday lectured his viewers: “Think of the House as a prosecutor and the articles of impeachment is a document detailing the alleged crimes.” So far so good.

But then, an MSNBC graphic incorrectly trumpeted the number of senators needed to convict a president: “60 VOTES out of 100 SEATS.” No, it’s 67 senators.

Though his graphic got it wrong, Velshi himself gave the correct information. Today, that is. On Wednesday, he incorrectly asserted: “Two-thirds of the Senate, 60 as it stands right now, are needed to vote guilty for impeachment.” On that day, Velshi said of the House’s role in impeachment: “Next, the House votes. At least two-thirds of the chamber has to approve the impeachment.” No, just a simple majority is needed.

On Thursday, Velshi managed to get that section right, noting: “A simple majority is all that’s needed to approve the impeachment.” BUT he made another error. The host claimed: “The Senate acquitted Andrew Johnson and Bill Clinton without impeaching them.” No, they were impeached in the House. Just not convicted in the Senate.

One might ask: Why is MSNBC giving daily updates attempting to explain the impeachment process? Another question might be: If they are going to explain impeachment, could Velshi and the network at least do so properly?


Firenze Sage opines:    If these idiots are so keen on impeaching Trump,you’d think they’d at least learn how to do it.

Or is it fake news?  The choice is fake news or stupidity.

What’s Palestine? [All Walls must go says Cory Booker]


All the Walls have to Go sign held by Cory Booker

Is  Cory Booker pro Palestine? Just not understand Israel’s need for a defense Wall?  Or just  fuzzy thinking? His denial does not hold up.

Senator Cory Booker was photographed holding a sign bearing a pro-Palestinian movement slogan. The image appeared on the Twitter feed of the U.S. Campaign for Palestinian Rights, a self-described “coalition of 330+ groups” working “for a US policy toward Palestine/Israel based on        freedom, justice, and equality.”

From Palestine to Mexico, all the walls have got to go,” the sign read.

Trump Wall opposed by open borders Booker

Booker, however, claims he wasn’t aware that the sign called for an end to the border wall between Israel and the Palestinian territory, but rather only a U.S. border wall with Mexico.  

“In one instance, amid the rush, he was posing for a photo and was passed a sign to hold – he didn’t have time to read the sign, and from his cursory glance he thought it was talking about Mexico and didn’t realize it had anything to do with Israel,”


Firenze Sage opines:  Do you suppose  he [Cory Booker]  reads proposed legislation with the same acuity?

Power tends to corrupt, absolutely [criminalize plastic straws]

“We have to regulate every aspect of people’s lives” says Santa Barbara politician

No Straw Man Here: The Mask Slips in Santa Barbara

Posted: 05 Aug 2018 08:52 AM PDT

(Steven Hayward)A little noticed detail in Santa Barbara’s recent drive to criminalize plastic straws, which culminated in the Santa Barbara city council taking testimony from a nine-year-old about the planetary menace, has come to light in recent days. During that council session, councilman Jesse Dominguez said the following in response to citizens who asked “what’s next?”:

“Unfortunately, common sense is just not common. We have to regulate every aspect of people’s lives.”


Firenze Sage opines:   This bozo [Jesse Dominquez]  got 1100 votes in his district and now wants to control the world based on the bogus “research of a nine year old.

Firenze Sage: save the planet [from climate change]- fall in ditch




Al Gore’s daughter protests climate change

Let’s do it in the dirt   ….  as climate change advocacy works … when done by Al Gore’s daughter who lay down in a pipeline protesting climate change and safety issues.

Karenna Gore  was among demonstrators who tried to block construction activity on the site by lying in a trench dug for the pipeline and refusing to move until firefighters removed them, said protest group Resist the Pipeline & Stop the West Roxbury Lateral.

Judge Mary Ann Driscoll has dismissed criminal charges against protestors including Al Gore’s daughter on the grounds that their actions were necessary to prevent climate change.

Judge sets aside charges in pipeline protest

Jordan Graham Thursday, March 29, 2018

The protesters, including Karenna Gore, the daughter of former Vice President Al Gore, were facing charges of trespassing and disturbing the peace after climbing into a construction trench. On Tuesday, prosecutors asked a judge to convert the criminal charges into civil infractions, saying in the event of a conviction they were unlikely to ask for any further punishment. After allowing the motion, Judge Mary Ann Driscoll found the defendants not responsible, saying she agreed with their argument that their actions were necessary to combat climate change.

“Based on the very heartfelt expressions of the defendants who believe, and I don’t question their beliefs in any respect, who believe in their cause because they believe they were entitled to invoke the necessity defense, I’ll accept what they said,” Driscoll said.


Firenze Sage:  What if they were covered with dirt and the defense was we don’t  believe in climate change —  or the justice system for that matter.

Do what you want as your beliefs will save thee.

Married white women are deplorable [do what men tell them says Hilary Clinton]

white women voted for Trump because men told them to do so —

Why white married women voted for Trump?

Hillary Clinton said that white women voted for President Trump during the 2016 presidential election because their husbands told them to, during a discussion at the India Today Conclave on Saturday.

The moderator asked Clinton why she thinks almost 52 percent of white women voted for Trump, despite them knowing about the controversial “Access Hollywood” tape.

“[Democrats] do not do well with white men and we don’t do well with married, white women,” Clinton explained. “And part of that is an identification with the Republican Party, and a sort of ongoing pressure to vote the way that your husband, your boss, your son, whoever, believes you should.”


Firenze Sage:  Will this hag ever broom her way under the carpet?  

A TAX on TEA started the American Revolution. Freedom from Government.Now CALIF proposes TAX on WATER. Reasons NOT to tax water?


WATER TAX SB 623 – Speak Up!

A TAX on TEA started the American Revolution. Freedom from government.

Now the State of California proposes a TAX on WATER.

Why should  all California households pay roughly a  $12 WATER Tax per year?

Tell  Santa Cruz County Supervisors NO on SB 623.

Speak up! Write your representatives.

Speak back to  State Senator Bill Monning who started this nonsense!

Here’s  reasons why it’s  important to speak up:

  1. The proposed rate can be INCREASED when the government  chooses. All taxes typically go up …
  2. Twenty-five percent (25%)  of money collected  can be — will be?–spent on administration.
  3.  Lower income families  will be overly  impacted. Why charge more for water than it costs?  Lower income persons  can  sign up for an exemption — but will they?   This tax is one more burden on those with lower incomes.  California already has the biggest disparity between RICH and POOR already.
  4.  Who will really pay? Consumers.   All costs of government are  passed on and the State of CA is not required  to pay back agencies for costs to collect.
  5. Polluters of ground water can continue to pollute and not affected by this law.  Makes no sense.  Polluters are off the hook until 2035.
  6. This law turns water providing agencies into tax collecting agencies. This is wrong.

Becky Steinbruner  says NO on proposed  Water Tax. 

Here’s Becky’s Letter to the  Santa Cruz Board of Supervisors:  

Dear Board of Supervisors and Clerk of the Board,
I was not able to register public comment using the Agenda Portal system on the Board of Supervisor website, so am writing you with my concerns regarding Consent Agenda Item #18.  I request that my letter be included for the Public Record as written correspondence regarding this issue and included with Board agenda communication available to the public at the mARCH 13, 2018 Board of Supervisor meeting.
I oppose Consent Agenda Item 18, a resolution to support SB 623 and ask that the Board NOT adopt a resolution, as recommended by Supervisor Zach Friend, for Santa Cruz County to endorse SB 623.  I request that Supervisor Friend publicly explain why the Board should  consider supporting it.
I have read the text of the proposed SB 623 legislation, re-introduced this year, and have the following objections:
1) While the water tax is currently proposed to be $.95 per month per household, the rate can be increased in the future if the State Board determines that the funding need is greater to assist communities with problematic water supplies.
Water is a basic requirement for life…should it be taxed even more than what it costs to produce it (Prop. 218 stipulates water sellers cannot charge more than the cost of supplying the water).  Any one who declares themselves impoverished (below 200% of the federal poverty limit which would be roughly $98,000/year for an individual) is exempt, but must file with their local water agency for exemption.  Will the poor all apply for exemption?
2)  Public water agencies would be mandated to collect and administer the tax monies to the State but on page 19 of the SB623 text, Section 6 says the State is not required to re-imburse local agencies unless the Commission on State Mandates determines it necessary.
SB 623 would ignore the California Constitutional mandate that local government be re-imbursed for collecting and administering state mandates.
3)  Polluters would “not be subject to enforcement undertaken or administered by State Board or regional boards under Chapter 5 (section 13330) for causing or contributing to an exceedance of a water quality objective of nitrate in groundwater” if the proposed Fertilizer Safe Drinking Water Fee or Dairy Safe Drinking Water Fee gets paid within 90 days of the contamination determination.  Why allow the polluters to continue contaminating the groundwater??? (see page 17 of the SB 623 text)
4)  Again, in Section 5, SB 623 would erase the Porter-Cologne Water Quality Control Act that mandates the State and regional boards oversee and enforce pollution control regulations to protect groundwater drinking supply safety for the public.  This bill would PROHIBIT the State Board or a regional board, until January 1, 2035, from “subjecting an agricultural operation, as defined, to specified enforcment for causing or contributing to a condition of pollution or nuisance for nitrates in groundwater if that agricultural operation demonstrates that it has satisfied other requirements of the timely payment of the fertilzer safe drinking water fee or the dairy safe drinking water fee, as applicable, into the fund.”
5)  SB 623 states the money collected with all these new taxes must only be used for projects addressing problematic groundwater supplies, but COULD  be transferred to other uses with a 2/3 vote of the legislature (section 116771 (f) on page 13 of the text).  I do not trust legislators not to dip into this fund for other “public benefit projects”
6)  SB 623 would allow community water systems to apply for exemption from collection of the per-household water tax, based on the finding that the amount that would be required to be remitted to the Board to be minimus, but the water company cannot appeal if the State denies their application. (116771 (d) on page 13.  Under 116772 (a) a public water system can apply to use an alternate assessment method for charges imposed by SB 623, but that alternate method, if approved, could only be used for five years maximum.
7)  SB 623 would require County Environmental Health Agencies to submit a list of all small water systems to the State Board by
January 1, 2019.  Again, this is requiring local government to spend time on meeting the State requirements but not getting re-imnbursed.  Santa Cruz County Environmental Health Agency staff does not have a comprehensive list of all small water companies but is working to collect that information for another State mandated program, the Sustainable Groundwater Management Plan, required to be submitted  and approved by the State by January 1, 2020.
8) SB 623 would mandate all fertilizer manufacturers, handlers, transporters and sellers to allow State Board access to any and all accounting practices, facilities and related information.  It would also mandate all dairies allow State Board access to any and all buildings and facilities as well as accounting practices and information.   NONE of this information however, including the audits of Safe Drinking Water Fees by the polluters, would be public information. (section 116772 (d) and (e)).   I do not trust that big corporations that may be contaminating groundwater would be held accountable for money paid in order to continue polluting.  Under SB 623, members of the public would not be able to file a Public Records Act request to find out.
9)  How much of this new tax money would actually get spent on improving problematic groundwater drinking supplies?  SB 623 allows the State Board to spend 25% of the fee money on administration.
10)  How will the State determine who gets the money?  SB 623 requires reports of problems by all water agencies to be submitted for consideration.  The money can be spent for “settlements from parties responsible for contamination of drinking water supplies” (Section 116768(1c), and in Section 116768 (2) states :” funds shall be prioritized for CONSOLIDATIONS”.  SB 623 removes mutually-owned water companies from the list of eligible applicants for project money.  These systems should also benefit from the possibility of grant assistance to improve water quality for safe potable use.
 Why would the Santa Cruz County Board of Supervisors want to support SB 623???.
Thank you Becky Steinbruner for your above Letter.

Monerey Bay Forum

127 Jewell Street
Santa Cruz, CA 95060
United States (US)
Phone: 831 688 6002
Fax: 831 688 7717

Santa Cruz CA traffic solutions: Greenway multi-modal roadway & walkway scores BIG on flexibility, takes people where they want to go, moves more people, provides choice

  Santa Cruz CA traffic solutions: Greenway multi-modal roadway & walkway scores BIG on flexibility, takes people where they want to go, moves more people, provides choice.

The East Bay got money from California to do a Greenway — let’s do likewise in Santa Cruz CA?

East Bay Greenway Awarded Active Transportation Program Grant

Sep 19, 2014 at 11:23am

$2.656 million state grant will help fulfill community vision to transform 15 miles under the BART tracks from Oakland to Hayward into a bicycle and pedestrian path.

The following is a comment from Rail Trail post written by Will 3/12/18  

“Westcliff  [Santa Cruz CA’s] multi-use path is not wide enough to function as a active transportation facility, period. At 10 feet wide it has built in conflicts for all user groups.

“This is why the Monterey coastal recreation trail is being widened to a width of 26 feet. 16 feet for the Bikeway allows for faster wheeled vehicles to pass in each direction. The separated 10 foot wide pedestrian sidewalk allows groups of two or more walkers walking side by side and pass each other.

“The plan is for the Greenway to use this same 16 + 10 formula wherever possible.

“The 26 feet needed for a proper active transportation facility does not fit over most of the rail corridor, particularly within the “Central Reach” of the system.

“From a Active Transportation perspective there is no comparison of the functionality of the bike and pedestrian facility embodied in the MBSST plan and what has been the proposed Greenway multi-modal roadway and walkway facility.

“As far as mass transit goes, the use of buses in a dedicated transit lane on Hwy 1 is three times faster than the headways predicted by the RTC for passenger rail between Santa Cruz and Watsonville (16 minutes vs ~42 minutes). Likewise for Santa Cruz and the Pajaro Station (20 vs ~60 minutes).

“There are over 220,000 trips daily on Hwy 1 today vs a prediction of 4,500 trips with the most ambitious plan described in the RTC’s rail feasibility study.
Do the math.

“The Greenway + a highway 1 based Bus Rapid Transit could serve 10 times the number of users and goes to where people are going to today: Cabrillo College, the greater Dominican Hospital complex, UCSC, Santa Cruz City and County government buildings, downtown Watsonville and Santa Cruz, etc.

“The existing freeway corridor is more central to the major employment and population centers than the rail corridor.

“From the standpoint of “social equity”, reductions of GHG emissions, active transportation users, health, sustainability and recreation all favor the Greenway and the democratization of the freeway to support and prioritized bus transit.   written by Will-


Aptos Psychologist: Consider traffic needs of our  most vulnerable  residents and build  solutions  into the overall transportation/  Greenway plan:  how mothers get two small children to school in AM, how the elderly get to medical appointments, how the very sick get to hospitals.

So far, I’ve not heard how to creatively use the frontage roads on either side of Highway #1 and integrate those roads in how better to allow people to move.

Consider ALL ways to move traffic NORTH in the AM and SOUTH in the PM.   For example, we could usse Soquel Avenue as done on the Golden Gate Bridge  — more lanes in AM versus PM.  We could use Traffic Persons rather than Lights to move the traffic on Soquel Avenue.

What say you?  How solve our traffic mess?

written by Cameron Jackson   

Monerey Bay Forum

127 Jewell Street
Santa Cruz, CA 95060
United States (US)
Phone: 831 688 6002
Fax: 831 688 7717

which RAIL TRAIL best for people living in Santa Cruz County? Still time to tell the RTC what you think!

Which RAIL TRAIL best for people who live in  Santa Cruz County?

Do we want a wide TRAIL  that can handle electric bikes and wheel chairs and walkers or do we want  a narrow trail  along a high fence that preserves the rail tracks for a train that may never happen?

There’s still time for you to tell the Regional Transportation Center what you think.

Measure D — which passed in 2017  — preserves the current  rail tracks and permits only a narrow trail.

Maybe there’s a better solution?  Read and decide.

Click  here   for a comparison of the wide one versus narrow one.

Go to the link below to sign petition.

Thank you Dana Abbott, a gardener with Aptos Community Garden, for providing information.

written by  Cameron Jackson

Firenze Sage: depends on whose ox is being gored [powerful Democrat woman accused of sexual misconduct with male staff]

Garcia (female) accused of sexual misconduct by Fierro (male staff)

Whose ox is being gored:   If something awful happens to someone you don’t know, or perhaps dislike, you are likely to ignore it in the first instance, or may even applaud it in the latter instance. If something awful happens to you or your loved ones, well, that’s a different story altogether.

Leading #MeToo California Assemblywoman Accused of Sexual Misconduct

 Daniel Fierro of Cerritos told POLITICO that in 2014, as a 25-year-old staffer to Assemblyman Ian Calderon, he was groped by Garcia, a powerful Democratic lawmaker who chairs the Legislative Women’s Caucus and the Natural Resources Committee.

He said she cornered him alone after the annual Assembly softball game in Sacramento as he attempted to clean up the dugout. Fierro, who said Garcia appeared inebriated, said she began stroking his back, then squeezed his buttocks and attempted to touch his crotch before he extricated himself and quickly left.

From The Sacramento Bee:

Garcia was “clearly inebriated,” Fierro said, and grabbed his arm. At first he thought she was just trying to steady herself, but then Garcia grabbed his back, he said, and began to stroke it.

“Her hand was there and it slipped down to my butt and she tried to squeeze,” Fierro said. He said he knew then that it had crossed a line and he spun away from her to leave. As he was walking past her, Fierro said, Garcia made a grab for his crotch.

“The entire encounter lasted 30-45 seconds,” he said. “I was in shock. I was embarrassed.”


Firenze Sage:  Will she  [Garcia] resign or rather attend one of the many classes devoted to telling people that sexual assault is wrong .