Disagree with the Lib vote recommendations on Prop H and Prop I


  Well, as I mentioned, I loved playing on grass fields in the rain as a kid, so I just don't buy the argument that they "simply can't be used in the rain" -- or that they require months of non-use each year. The grass at Dolores Park near where I live gets heavy use year-round, and occasionally certain areas are closed for reseeding, but not to the best of my knowledge for anything like months at a time (not counting the current overhaul of large areas of the park, which the city conveniently timed to shut down much of it for the warmest and busiest time of the year!). Nor can I take it as a given that we must simply accept the unreasonableness of the unions in not letting community volunteers do maintenance work on the fields. As to stadium lighting making the area less "sketchy", I don't think it's an appropriate solution. Putting in some street-level lighting with a warm, friendly glow would do a lot more to make the area inviting. Not that I feel it's a particular dangerous area to begin with -- when I've seen crime maps of the city, I don't recall western Golden Gate Park showing up prominently. The incident you recount is pretty vague -- for all I can tell it could have been nothing more than the police grossly over-reacting to a report of someone exercising his Second Amendment rights. Even if not, he was probably there trying to escape the police, not harm kids. Given the cops' penchant for shooting at suspects, I would have been more worried about being hit by one of their stray bullets than anything else.

  In short, we may have to agree to disagree, but rest assured that the LPSF will continue seeking to cut government spending and prioritize maintenance of existing basic infrastructure over new programs, employee salaries, and the like ("I can't manage the city's budget for them, but if we could only cut services somewhere else, we would easily maintain the grass fields.")

  By the way, if you have any connection with the No on H / Yes on I campaign, I hope you will tell them that I don't appreciate their using robocalls. I just got an automated call from them today -- thankfully the only robocall so far this political season (I keep hoping the people who use such tactics will get a clue and become more respectful of the public). The first part of the call got cut off, but it was a recording of some young kid asking me to vote no on H so "kids like me can play". There was a legally mandated notice at the end with a phone number to call -- (415) 363-9736 -- so I called it. And got another recording with no way to leave a message other than to press "1" to be removed from their call list. Pressing "0" got a message saying that selection was not "valid". But the most offensive part was that the recording says "We called you to participate in a conversation about current events" -- yeah, right! A "conversation" where only one side gets to speak!

  Anyway, that's my rant on that. :slight_smile: I do thank you for getting in touch with us. You haven't said whether you're a Libertarian, or what led you to do so, but I encourage you to come to one of our meetings sometime and say hello in person. If there is ever an issue you're working on that is a clear-cut case of favoring more civil liberties or economic freedom, I hope you'll reach out and let us know, perhaps we can help.

Love & Liberty,
                               ((( starchild )))