Narrow Search

  • Show Only

  • Category

  • Narrow by Date

    • All
    • Today
    • Last 7 Days
    • Last 30 Days
    • Select a Date Range

Comment Archives: stories: News & Opinion: Editor's Note

Re: “The Express' New Commenting Policy

This comment was deleted because it violates the Express' new commenting policy, which bars anonymous commenting. See a full explanation of the change here.

4 likes, 4 dislikes
Posted by Editor on 11/01/2011 at 9:48 PM

Re: “The Express' New Commenting Policy

For more on this see "You are Not a Gadget" by Jaron Lanier. He makes a good case for why anonymity has been so destructive on the internet.

4 likes, 6 dislikes
Posted by chrisg on 10/31/2011 at 1:11 PM

Re: “The Express' New Commenting Policy

anonymous! but our lives are that! what happens when privitization ends? it has but some are not willing to admit some news does need to leak so some wont reak of evil! so what if its about a carmen of oakland ca? so what if its about a frisco boy? they are news and THEIR actions speak louder than any anonymous life how about that? nyse is over but these two are people who did it for them is that such a good thing to keep private? not really because they like long distance phone bills

3 likes, 4 dislikes
Posted by paulina castenas on 10/27/2011 at 4:22 PM

Re: “The Express' New Commenting Policy

Very good policy! I've always used my name but sometimes thought I was peculiar since so many did not.

6 likes, 10 dislikes
Posted by Joyce Roy on 10/26/2011 at 11:35 PM

Re: “Editor's Note

"You Perata lovers sure are thick-headed and thin-skinned."
"I guess I'll have to explain this post to you since you're obviously too dimwitted to understand what it's about."
"It seems pretty pathetic that someone has to spell this out for you."
-Posted by Robert Gammon

Posted by Your Name Here on 09/10/2011 at 7:59 AM

Re: “Editor's Note

Good for you, Lawngun. A great book.
Please no pictures, some of us need to lose serious weight.

Posted by mike_hardesty7909a on 08/05/2011 at 5:37 PM

Re: “Editor's Note

Yes, she did. I wonder why EBE did not encourage commenters to include their picture on their posts, like I do? (There, this thread is back on topic.) Before you say, "Hey, that's just a spider", think Charlotte's Web. I read the book 21 times.

Posted by Lawngun on 08/05/2011 at 3:07 PM

Re: “Editor's Note

Thanks, Lawngun. Did Bella die in 1998 ?
Thanks, yoyo, I learn from you every week.

Posted by mike_hardesty7909a on 08/05/2011 at 2:56 PM

Re: “Editor's Note

Had you said 1999, it may have cast some doubt as to the veracity of your story. 1977? I'll buy that.

Posted by Lawngun on 08/05/2011 at 10:53 AM

Re: “Editor's Note

I never realized "typo" was a verb. You learn something new every day....:)

Posted by yoyo_guru on 08/05/2011 at 10:45 AM

Re: “Editor's Note

On my comment on Mom and Bella Abzug, I typoed the year, it was 1977, not 1997.

Posted by mike_hardesty7909a on 08/05/2011 at 10:20 AM

Re: “Editor's Note

I take it back. It DOES get better. LOL. :)

Posted by yoyo_guru on 08/04/2011 at 6:58 PM

Re: “Editor's Note

You guys are too much ! A good vodka would fit the bill right now.
I will tell you a funny story. In late summer 1997 I took my Mom to
Logan Airport in Boston for her trip back to DC. I was driving up to
Maine and then going back to SF five days later.
It took me an hour and a half to drive the 15 miles from Lexington to
Logan because of the traffic. The airline gave Mom a First Class seat next
to Bella Abzug and they got into it on abortion. Mom was a staunch anti-
abortionist and she had the distinct pleasure of telling Bella that her Mom
should have opted for choice ! I was anti-abortion at the time and thought
that very funny. I still do !

Posted by mike_hardesty7909a on 08/04/2011 at 6:41 PM

Re: “Editor's Note

It doesn't get any better than this. :)

Posted by yoyo_guru on 08/04/2011 at 6:29 PM

Re: “Editor's Note

And, by the way, mike, I once had some guilty spermatozoa, but I'm saving that story for Bawdy Storytelling Night. http://www.eastbayexpress.com/ebx/spicing-…

Posted by Lawngun on 08/04/2011 at 6:13 PM

Re: “Editor's Note

And, mike, my symbiont thinks your comment is hilarious, too.

Posted by Lawngun on 08/04/2011 at 6:09 PM

Re: “Editor's Note

I was going to suggest a round of Kumbaya to celebrate the heightened level of civility around this place, but I think I'll tear into the chilled bottle of Viognier in the fridge and ponder what Ed. thinks about the comments on the new policy.

Posted by Lawngun on 08/04/2011 at 6:05 PM

Re: “Editor's Note

No, yoyo, the spermatozoa, zygote, fetus is not innocent nor guilty. It's there as a result of sex. Does that then mean the woman is obliged to carry it to term ? Let's be honest here, I'm not a feminist, but if men could become pregnant do you think these laws against abortion would ever have existed ?
The main lobby in the 19th century for them was not the RC Church but the AMA. What we talking about here is not just nine months of suffering through a pregnancy but at least a generation of raising the child.
There are many people not fit for this ardous task and who's to say what others have to do with their lives ? I'm opposed to compulsory abortion a la Red China but I do think the Hyde Amendment in the late 70s was one of the more stupid pieces of legislation to come down the pike.
Why would we want to encourage patently unfit women to bear kids ?
That should be their choice of course but compared to all the other government programs it's the best bang for the buck (no pun intended.)
Ultimately what I said is the strongest argument for abortion choice.
I never used the word 'invasion.'
Pro-choice is a very weak argument for lefty libs.
Let's see, are you pro-choice if a guy doesn't want to admit blacks to his restaurant ? Or if he wants to buy more than one gun a month ?
I could give these examples ad infinitum.
The 'pro-life' folks could care less about the life of the woman and many support wars, the death penalty, are indifferent to animal cruelty, etc.
My argument, not original with me, gets rid of the trimester quiblings,
accepts the fetus as human but with no rights until after birth, separation from the mother. Even 'pro-lifers' don't celebrate their birthdays on their day of conception. Physical which is really metaphysical separation from another person marks the beginning of a new person entitled to legal protection. This is the least arbitrary way to define a person.
Glad I could provide some welcome amusement on this dreary news day.
Thanks as always for your thoughts.

Posted by mike_hardesty7909a on 08/04/2011 at 5:29 PM

Re: “Editor's Note

p.s. I'm sorry. I guess that wasn't very "civil" of me. But it literally just cracks me up. Never heard that particular line of reasoning before.:)

Posted by yoyo_guru on 08/04/2011 at 4:11 PM

Re: “Editor's Note

Mike, This is the weirdest reason I've ever heard for being pro-choice. " no human being has the right to be born or to live inside the body of another against that person's will." Are you kidding? This is just hilarious. You're saying the fetus has its own will and has invaded the mother, and therefore is a living being (BTW), and because of this deserves to be killed? I'm as pro-choice as the next guy but this is just over the top. LOL LOL LOL I was literally laughing out loud all afternoon over this. The evil baby invades the mother and deserves to die. Bwa-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha!!

Posted by yoyo_guru on 08/04/2011 at 4:05 PM

Most Popular Stories


© 2016 East Bay Express    All Rights Reserved
Powered by Foundation