Re: Mayoral race
Kevin Dempsey Peterson (peterson@ocf.Berkeley.EDU)
Sun, 8 Feb 1998 19:50:14 -0800
On 8 Feb 1998, Daniel C. Burton wrote:
>Of course not, but the sidewalk isn't his property. It's the property of
>the city. You don't have the right to keep people from walking on it or
>appropriate it for your own use.
I'm not sure of this. Whatever the deed says, though, we're better off
with sidewalks, like streets, being public property (or owned by a
separate agency, which also owns the street). It's a better solution
than having it owned by the business owner, with numerous restrictions.
>I'm speculating that if Mayor Dean is willing to limit freedoms on public
>land, she's also willing to do so on private property. She did, after all,
>support the smoking ban in Berkeley, which will by the way remain in effect
>even if they can repeal the statewide one.
>
>Since almost everyone seems to support things like smoking bans and all
>sorts of violations of individual rights, it's probably not a good idea for
>us to support anyone. In fact, I'm leaning towards endorsing "none of the
>above." At least low voter turnout is interpreted as a sign that
>something's wrong.
Screw low voter turn out -- write in "None of the Above". Not voting
leaves it unclear why people didn't vote. A write in (for anyone) is a
clear indication that you care who is in office, but don't like any of
the options. Besides, Dean 40% what's her name 35% other 25% would be a
good encouragement for anyone else who is considering running.
I voted lessor of the two evils last election. This is pointless -- the
slime don't know they aren't wanted. If I can't find anyone who I
actually agree with (at least mostly), I'll be voting "Zippy the
Pinhead" for most offices. (Find teh reference to voting for Zippy and
win a Scooby Snack.)
-Kevin