Gone Too Far

This weekend something a bit unexpected occurred. It appears that on Saturday October 20th Wenche received eight emails from yahoo and hotmail accounts of a disturbing nature. I will comment on those letters in a different blog as it does involve me. All eight messages came from eight different email addresses and at eight different times. Each message had different content on it and had a different style of writing to them. One of two things has occurred here. Either one person using eight email accounts is sending eight different messages for the fun of it or this was a result of a coordinated effort. It's improbable that Wenche would receive eight messages from eight different people randomly. Now, Wenche has received messages in the past and that's understandable but this was a little too obvious.

The content of the messages were all negative about me. Basically the messages in not so settle ways tried to create a wedge between me and Wenche and initiate a break up between us. How much were lies, distortions, ignorance, or half truths cannot be none yet, but the purpose was clear. Some of the messages had to deal with Solidarity, I blame the Davis Wiki because I told those fools to take it down and they haven't. No wonder we both get messages about Solidarity, and especially true that we get messages from people who assume we stand for things that are out of date. But these messages were a little more than political.

Now normally I would be amused by such a coordinated effort to cause me grief and damage. Knowing that many people within the liberal establishment hate me so much that they would try this kind of personal attack makes me proud to be who I am. But this is a little different because it not only affects me but Wenche as well. The messages were disturbing, upsetting, and downright depressing. I have three theories about how this attack came about:

Theory 1: One person using eight email accounts sent eight different nasty letters to Wenche about eight different subjects to make it appear as if eight people were attacking her. This tactic of using sock puppet email accounts to make you more numerous than you actually are is something I do all the time, however I have never used such accounts in such a manner. For instance I have twelve empirestv accounts, pretty obvious all of the accounts belong to me. If this theory is true than the person sending the messages has no life and is creepy as hell, beyond my level of shadiness which is quite high.

Theory 2: A group of people got together and sent out the messages in a coordinated fashion in order to cause a romantic break up between Wenche and I and hoped to shatter Solidarity. This seems more likely but who was the leader? Was this done in a meeting or something that was discussed around on the phone or AIM. Was it a slate, eight messages is a similar size to a slate? Was it one person who got a bunch of buddies and sent out the messages. Either way, a coordinated effort to cause emotional distress and pain is a new low for any organization or group.

Theory 3: Completely random happenings. So unlikely that I do not consider it a reality.

Now you might disagree with me for various reasons, maybe you even hate me personally and I understand that. But to send messages to my girlfriend in order to cause a break up is a low that I would never stoop to. I am not only annoyed by this but qutie angered by this as well. All of the accounts were made from non-UC Davis accounts making it difficult to track who these people are. Better hope to hell your email address don't find their way on a search engine where I can track a name. It was smart to be anonymous but it was also quite cowardly. Smart because I will have difficulty retaliating against you.

What is imporant about all of this is that it ultimately failed. Solidarity is the same as it was: dormant, and our relationship still exists. Even if we did break up over whatever reason it would never be because of you guys and your silly emails. I am going to make a copy of all of these messages, I am going to try and find out who sent them, and then I am going to see what I can do about it. This isn't the first time either. Wenche has received text messages from anonymous sources that have personally attacked her. You might think that this is normal in student government politics and what not. No, it's not. It really isn't okay to send a coordinated armada of emails to someone in order to damage a relationship. It's not okay to send out creepy text messages to someone's phone. What next, will we get visits to the apartment from ASUCD ninjas?

But you know what cheers us up during bad times? There is the pleasure in knowing that someday we will be able to strike back at you guys and it won't be through emails, it will be so much worse. Keep the emails coming, it will help me find out who you are.

ASUCD On Hold

This week was for the most part uneventful. Wenche came over on Thursday but wanted to stay inside most of the the day due to the fact she was still a little sick and we didn't have a car. We had some plans to go to "Davis is Burning" but that was called off when she went back home today. Wenche wants me to go to more of these "events," which is fine. My knowledge of LGBT and gender issues is comparable to Wenche, it's not too hard to learn everything there is to know on the subject. I have no problem going to Generation Sex Week events or Davis is Burning, I was kind of looking forward to it. Sometimes when I go to one of these events or a GASC meeting the mood suddenly becomes cold and depressed; my presence alone causes people to watch what they say and do. I hope to change that perception or wait for the institutional memory to fade out.

As for Solidarity, I repeatedly asked that it be taken off the Davis Wiki. When the very people that had provided all of the information later recant everything you would expect for it to be deleted. Somehow Jabber and the other editors would rather have it kept up out there as a mini forum for people to trash it. For those of you bold enough to make comments, we are not listening. But anyway, just one of many things that will not occur on the Redding Wiki. I am quite pleased with how the Redding Wiki is working. I get to work on it with relative peace, virtually every Davis Wiki editor has been banned by now, I would be surprised if any pop up. I hope to contact the Redding Record Searchlite on Monday and see if I can get a press release out there. People from Redding who may still know me from back when will be surprised to see that. Once I have donations or an income building I will get a domain name for the Redding Wiki which will stop the conspiracies on the Wiki Spot of killing the Redding Wiki.

From the very beginning I assumed the Davis Wiki forces would try to kill the Redding Wiki so I decided to save all of the Redding Wiki pages, all 192 of them on Microsft Word documents. So, in the event it is deleted it will be really irritating but I can get it back to before within a day. Also, there are quite a few administrators on the Redding Wiki including some back up accounts to be used if my primary user name is somehow deleted or banned from Wiki Spot. The more time that goes by the more I get the impression that either the Davis Wiki forces can't or are unwilling to delete the Redding Wiki. With that in mind I feel quite content right now. As for the Redding Wiki failing to meet expectations, it is now the 5th highest California Wiki city and will soon be the 4th highest within a week. Many city wikis at first are constructed by only a few individuals. As for Karl Mogel complaint that the Redding Wiki is somehow being denied by his inability to participate that would be quite an exaggeration; I have all of the photos I will ever need of Lassen Volcanic National Park and anything else I need.

As for ASUCD I am going to try to work with any Independents that managed to get their signatures in. Right now I have a lot of issues to deal with like buying a car, a new apartment, dealing with the city over the non-profit status of Solidarity, my two banks, KDVS, and job searching. So ASUCD is not on the top of my list right now. Once I have all of my issues figured out I will be able to deal with ASUCD; I can wait, I am not going anywhere for some time.

But there are a few things that annoy me. My first annoyance is Max Mikalonis who went to Becky's house and trash talked about ASUCD until she decided to drop out of the Senate race. Not only is that a bit messed up that you would go through her to attack me but you are a poor excuse for an ASUCD official. That is the exact opposite of outreach and I know you hate ASUCD but misery loves company right. The second is Andrew Bianchi who also talked Michelle Fisher out of running and then told her she could get a position within ASUCD that is not even open. Yeah, you lost, but thanks for putting someone else down. And worst of all is GO. Natalia and Eric both sent messages to all of the candidates telling them to drop out and trash talked me and Wenche. I get called a bastard and a creep all the time but this is a little different because I don't have anything to lose, the candidates do when you discourage them and tell them lies about the system. I got all sorts of stories. One is the campaigning is a 15 hour a week commitment, maybe for your slate, but not for us. Then, another one was that they should get some commission experience before running. That's helpful except GO has no representation in the commissions, never will, never has. You guys have no experience at all, and you know the establishment only promotes their pals and allies to the commissions. In sort, you guys deserve to lose and I hope GO takes a dive. I know so much on you guys, it makes me sick that you can get away with what you guys do in your personal and political lives. Wenche and I will outlast your stay at UC Davis and then we'll reverse your non-existent agenda.

On November 5th I will chill with the Yolo County Republicans and see what is going on for the election and what not. I haven't been tracking city news much but I get the impression that there are only four people running and three of them are incumbents. I see the incumbents easily winning if it stays as it is, which is fine I suppose, I don't really agree with Sue Greenwald on most issues. Davis is so different than Redding and the more I work on the Redding Wiki, it becomes more and more clear.

Banned Davis Wiki Editors

There are many of you that I have already banned. Some of you managed to get by me only to get yourself legitimately banned a few days later. You guys do not represent all Davis Wiki editors and I have not banned every Davis Wiki editor from the Redding Wiki.

However, our past history and especially in the last few weeks has been so strained that I fear allowing an invasion of overly hostile editors onto the Redding Wiki. I cannot be constantly tried and attacked for decisions made on the Redding Wiki at this crucial point. Redding Wiki must be unified, at peace, calm, and absent of drama.

The bans have been talked about as being permanent. This is not entirely accurate although I have certainly given that indication. The bans are merely suspensions and eventually a majority of those banned will be unbanned. A few things must happen first before this happens. There must be communication between you and me on what your intentions are. I don't have to agree with your views but I need this contact. I also want to have the Redding community to outnumber in absolute and relative power to Davis Wiki editors so as to preserve culture and to give this over to the Redding people. There are also a few other things that will greatly speed this process and bring about greater trust but I don't care to bring it up.

Some of you I will never allow under any circumstances to be on the Redding Wiki and you know who you are. But for the most part this is a temporary situation. This will probably not satisfy you guys, but that is where I am at right now.

Wiki Meritocracy

The AUSCD Slate GO has revealed themselves on Facebook today. My pal, Joseph Bleckman, is an administrator of the group. Nice to see that he is moving up in the world. I had speculated that they had a secret group and now I find myself fascinated by the way they wish to pitch themselves. Normally I would put their information on the Davis Wiki but I feel rather lazy at the moment. Hopefully Joe can do it, or else GO will never be updated.

The Redding Wiki is almost at 100 pages but it is a slow development as there are only 8 active editors, and half of them just want to complain against me. I will be making some phone calls to Redding institutions for advice, assistance, and a heads up tomorrow.

I have decided to make some political reforms for the Wiki. It will be an Imperial Meritocracy where those who contribute the most have the most say. Whenever an administrator feels that a vote is needed on an edit or subject the Redding Wiki Council would have a say in how events unfold. In other words every person will become a "party" of sort where somone could have 99% of the vote or 1% of the vote. This is an improvement from the Davis Wiki in that some ten edit punk won't be able to vote to ban me and have it say much. Under this new voting system a 10 edit person would have less than 1% of the vote. Also, the relative power difference of the editor in the real world won't have any affect on the decision making abilities of the Wiki. Also, it allows for ten small editors to attack a strong editor such as myself and the stronger editor could outvote the ten smaller editors. This works under the theory that not all editors are equal and it works under the idea of earned power instead of democracy. This is how a company would work, how a company would vote. I hope to hold elections soon, the 20th of September is my goal.

As to the argument that this will give incentive for Wiki editors to basically spam their way to the top, it's not realisitic. I still have administrative powers even if I only have 1% voting power. Also I decide what is to be voted on or needs to be discussed by the council; basically I control the agenda. The page worth is higher than the edit worth, so someone will advance quicker by making pages. There are still ways to get around the system of course and I have already considered the various ways it could be accomplished. However, someone who tries to advance themselves in such a way could be excluded from the election or outright banned. Even if an editor manages to get high amounts of power in edit counts they would still have the equivalent power of the Russian Parliament. This could very well change as the highest editors become established. A spammer like Laabs will never outnumber a true editor, under both systems I had come up with he would have had less than 5%.


I had my first clash on NPOV on a restaurant. It was an interesting discussion, I hope to avoid the chaotic situation currenly found on Dos Cayotes. I am not sure exactly how I will be able to protect businesses but also give real people the freedom to say what they want. However, I side with Amy Lee in the discussion, but I suppose the solution is to make sure all commentors use their real name. There have been other management problems such as Carlos' affinity for putting Bob Dylan quotes everywhere. I don't think he's taking this project seriously, or he may be testing my resolve. I will revert a page regardless of the person.

Two Davis Wiki editors I had banned are now allowed to make edits once more. There were a lot of reasons as to why I changed my mind but a lot has to do with the fact that they bothered to contact me. Since I have un-banned them I have banned two more to take their place so I am not bowing to any type of pressure. Normally I would have put Brent Laabs' second account manifestation ban to a vote, but elections have not been held.

I will be going to Chico soon to talk with some Redding residents who I went to high school with. They may have some interest in editing the Redding Wiki. It seems like it takes a special person to actually work on a Wiki.

Redding Wiki

Today I decided to make more edits on the Sacramento Wiki to fill the missing gap that is the Davis Wiki. Although I was successful in getting my Fraternity recognized it was only through an indirect process. Although I can freely go about my editing business on the Sacramento Wiki I do not know a whole lot about the city. As such I have become more enthused about visiting Sacramento and making more productive edits as considered by the administrators. During my time at the Sacramento Wiki I haven't had to deal with any reverts and all personal attacks to my Wiki user page have been deleted by the administrators.

But I wanted to take it a next step further and create a Wiki for my hometown of Redding. There are several advantages to this plan. Only I, Steven Ostrowski, have lived in Redding for 16 years and only I can properly edit it so as to bring out Redding glory and pride. Shortly I will have people from Redding involved in this process so as to create more perspective. However, in the meantime the Redding Wiki will be NPOV as it should be for all wikis. This will prevent the very small amount of current editors from creating heavy bias on the pages. It is also quite ideal for everyone involved, their businesses, and reputations.

As a security pre-caution I have banned several users, about a dozen now, from the Redding Wiki. These individuals are either political enemies or trouble makers on the Davis Wiki and I will not allow their drama, insults, and idiocy to harm my own hometown's Wiki. One tried to get around me but within a short time he has found himself completely banned. His actions just before he was snuffed out is exactly what I mean when I need editors who are going to join not for the purpose of challenging me. Jason Aller is doing an excellent job and will probably surpass me in edits in the short run. He has done a great deal and I am pleased that he is taking part in this mission.

There are two administrators for the Redding Wiki and I hope to keep it that way so as to not overly complicate things. Last thing I want are administrators fighting amongst each other. I will make a great wiki either through administration or page building. I am going to greatly enjoy building this Wiki and I hope that the people of Redding will appreciate my style, committment, effort, and judgment.

Sacramento Wiki Expansion

I have created a new Facebook group for the sole purpose of editing the Sacramento Wiki which I have determined is in great need of work. I am also aware of the flood of active Davis Wiki editors who have landed themselves into Sac Wiki. As such it is important to bring more editors to the Sacramento Wiki in order to create greater activity and neutrality. I have added six hundred people to the group and hopefully it will amount to a large group, other administrators may add hundreds more. If the group expands to a large degree I will be able to coordinate lecture hall classes on how to edit the Sacramento Wiki which in turn will assist in teaching how the Davis Wiki works as well.

The Wiki is simple to use but it is sometimes intimidating to many people and it has become necessary to add more people to both the Davis and Sacramento Wiki systems. The reason being is that less than 1% of the population define what Davis and Sacramento are. This creates bias and a lack of perspective and information to the system.

As such I am going to bring it upon myself to teach wheoever is willing as to how the system works because I know a great deal about it, probably not as good as the administrators but good enough. This is consistent and a small part of the overall plan to change Davis.

There are a few observations to be made. First of all, no ASUCD official from any slate will be allowed in the group. If you join I will ban you. This is also the case with any non-friendly Davis Wiki editors. You are poison for discussion, teaching, and good will.

I am hopeful that this will give me greater editorial control, better networking abilities, and will flood both Wiki systems with new blood.

The Beginning

On September 10, 2007, a date I will remember for a long time I was banned from the Davis Wiki. So, it would seem the master of the dark side has been slain. The Davis Wiki will lack a great deal of perspective with me gone. In a very short time a lot of activity will become noticeable in UC Davis, especially ASUCD, and in the City of Davis. How this will be portrayed is really unknown now that this has happened.

In the near future I will be training “apprentices” in how the Davis Wiki works. I will teach them code and how to make edits on how to deal with idiots like William Lewis. I will assist them in how to use talk pages and revert edits to protect their accounts and their friend’s accounts from lies and defamations of the enemy.

In order to show more evidence that I am a great Wiki Editor, as in the greatest of all time in this community I will be working on the Sac Wiki and in a very short time I will be the #1 editor on the Sac Wiki and will soon have more edits than both Founders combined. I will show the Sac Wiki editors that I am the reasonable one and that the others are a bunch of growling attack dogs. I will redeem myself to those in Sacramento with positive edits that will bring balance, neutrality, and accurate information. It will become apparently clear that I am one of the best on this.

I want to thank those who have assisted me on the Davis Wiki and defended me on the talk page. Despite the fact that I told you not to in order to protect your reputations and public image you did it anyway. That’s really telling about your editing style and friendship and I will remember it. I especially thank Max for bringing this whole system to my attention.

Now to the Davis Wiki’s reputation: You may think you are the greatest thing on Earth but I know what others think of you outside your bubble. You are a loaded gun, a weapon to be used against people in local Davis politics. For many that is your purpose and you have allowed it to happen. You will continue to allow it to happen. I hope that changes, I really do.

As for an apology, guess what, not happening. I may have been a bit rude but no where near the others. I will not apologize one bit no matter what. My conscious will not allow me too because it will give credibility, honor, and respect to my enemies and I will never give them that satisfaction. Nor will I lie about myself in order to get back on the Davis Wiki. By submitting to the others I will have betrayed my ideals, principles, friends, and allies and the worse thing on Earth is betrayal and disloyalty. I would rather be hated then ask forgiveness from the likes of Schwab, the most manipulative public figure in the history of the Davis Wiki.

To the general community of Davis Wiki, I hope to meet you all in person. I will go to your restaurants, your communities, your clubs, and to you as a person so that I may be able to reach out. I want to know how I can help you in Davis whether it be about the quality of life in Davis or your ideals. We may not agree but I will respect it. Soon, everyone in Davis will know who I am and it will be the most positive thing in my life. I don’t need the likes of William Lewis to tell me who I am.

If you wish to talk to me in person about this, call me, or AIM me you may do so I will happily talk to you about anything about the Davis Wiki. All of this should be very interesting for the journal a friend of mine is writing up. There are some individuals I have no interest talking to and they know who they are, but I am a very pleasant person to have a conversation with. Tis all, may my ghost haunt your little club.

LEAD's Hold on Davis Wiki II

These are some conpiled stats I counted up. I may be off by maybe a few on the really big edit counts but none of the stats should be off by any more than 1%. This blog entry is on going as I will probably add more examples and pages.

ASUCD

48 Edits by LEAD 29%

6 Edits by Non-LEAD 3.7%

163 total

LEAD

3 Edits by Non-LEAD 2%

33 Edits and neutrals 22%

112 Edits by LEAD 76%

Student Focus

65 Edits by Student Focus and Steven Ostrowski 30%

45 Edits by LEAD 21%

110 Edits by Neutral 51%

James Schwab Public Page

31 Edits by LEAD 69% (48% of are made by Schwab)

14 Edits by Neutrals 31%

0 Edits by Student Focus and Steven Ostrowski 0%

Spencer Higgins

69 Edits by LEAD 35%

7 Edits by Student Focus 3.5%

68 Edits by Steven Ostrowski 34%

55 Edits by Neutrals 28%

Kareem Salem

10 Edits by LEAD 40%

1 Edit by Student Focus 4%

14 Edits by Neutrals 56%

Andrew Peake

26 Edits by LEAD 46%

16 Edits by Student Focus and Steve Ostrowski 28%

15 Edits by Neutrals 26%

Steven Ostrowski

142 Edits by LEAD 23%

82 Edits by William Lewis 13%

16 Edits by Ally Joseph Bleckman 2.6%

215 Edits by Steve Ostrowski 35% (Ostrowski’s edits to his own public page is 35% and Schwabs is 33%)

9 Edits by other allies some of which are probably sock puppets of Ostrowski 1.4%

144 by Neutrals 24% + Lewis 13%= 37% total

Total Edits: 608

Students For Life 221-343

Gabe Koulikov Pro Life: 8 (6.6%)

Steven Ostrowski Pro Life: 27 (22%)

Steve’s Sock Puppets: 8 (6.6%)

Hostiles against Students For Life: (Karl, James, William, Pxlated, Brent) 48 (39%)

Neutrals: 31 (25%)

Total 122 (100%)

LEAD's hold on Davis Wiki

It is my belief that the Davis Wiki is often used as a political football by the powers that control ASUCD. The LEAD slate dominates the Davis Wiki among ASUCD savvy individuals. I do not count neutral editors in this study due to their low involvement in ASUCD edits. In this study I have listed partisans to LEAD and the former Student Focus and myself. It is my conclusion for this last year that those who oppose the LEAD regime in any particular way will quickly find their profiles and reputations in ruins. If it is not a conscious effort is an unconscious one as the Davis Wiki's tilt has gone LEAD's way. One only has to look at the LEAD wiki page and then my own public page. When it comes to opposition party's pages they are at the mercy of LEAD editors who will blatantly attack or make settle edits to make them look bad. It is my firm belief that the only thing that protects myself, my activities, my groups, my friends and allies, my favored groups, or groups I have sympathy towards from LEAD is me.

While LEAD has taken great measures to make their enemies look foolish I have taken the honorable path of not outing the drug addictions, recreational drug use, sexual orientations, corruption scandals, criminal activity, etc of LEAD officials.

I do not necessarily believe in NPOV as I love to see what people think and I find every page of the Davis Wiki filled with human feeling and emotion. Sometimes I sense humor, anger, curiosity, joy, and hatred in many of the Davis Wiki pages. With LEAD they have collectively used the Davis Wiki as an advertisement sign and are tilting it towards their side. Why is this important? The Davis Wiki is not in my view supposed to be a collection of half truths, feelings, and lies. It is to be the truth as determined by those who know. Not every Davis Wiki editor is equal. I have knowledge of a subject that others do not. Other editors have knowledge that I do not. Every editor in a way is specialized due to their proximity to the subject they are editing or their connection with the subject.

In any case if words alone cannot convince you I have listed all of the editors aligned with LEAD and everyone else. Although not all of them make constant ASUCD edits I do not either. This is to show the bias, the tilt, the gang up I experience on a regular basis. The solution is simple, a reduction in Davis Wiki LEAD editors by reducing the amount of LEAD officials who know of ASUCD, or teaching non-LEAD members how to use the Davis Wiki. With these two choices in mind it is clear that I must do both for the sake of the Davis Wiki and ASUCD. From this point on I will teach others how to use the Davis Wiki more than I have done in the past. I find myself horrified at what would happen to those not associated with LEAD if I had not been present on the Davis Wiki.

LEAD Davis Wiki Editors

BrentLaabs 3750 200 126
JamesSchwab 1511 90 74
DavidPoole 1258 64 33
JimSchwab 795 107 32
MaxMikalonis 600 13 16
PaulHarms 561 5 8
JillWeinstein 150 5 9
BobbyGray 140 26 0
AndrewPeake 132 0 1
KevinPowers 125 2 14
StevenLee 112 3 14
AndrewBianchi 93 1 8
DanXie 83 5 15
GennaCarnes 62 5 5
WeMo 57 2 64
MatthewShannon 54 0 0
DarylSuyat 13 4 4

Total LEAD edits: 9496 70.2% of all edits

Student Focus Davis Wiki Editors

JosephBleckman 857 26 1
JoseBleckman 217 5 0
EvanChait 117 5 4
CameronMenezes 99 0 0
ChrisHerold 36 3 2
AlexandraFrick 13 0 0
MollySundstrom 12 0 0

Total Student Focus edits: 1351 10% of all edits


Steve Ostrowski Davis Wiki Editor
SteveOstrowski 2634 89 40
StevenOstrowski 48 1 0

Total Steven Ostrowski edits: 2682 + (10-20) 19.8%

Conflict on F Street

Tonight, after being thwarted for two days, Ronald Payne and I went to see Harry Potter V possibly one of the best movies of all time. This is consistent with my belief that Star Wars III, Transformers, and Matrix Reloaded are legendary in film or will be in the near future. Ron and I met at the movie theater at around 9:30pm, about twenty minutes before the movie was to start, and I had not bought a ticket yet.

While Ron and I talked a strange person decided to join us. He was taller than us and seemingly older. He had on a white t-shirt with a blue icon on the front, jeans, presumably tennis shoes. He had short curly brown hair and had a pale Caucasian complexion. It seemed a little strange that he would only have a t-shirt on; I was comfortable only when I had my sweatshirt on.

He approached us asking for help giving me the early impression that he was in need of money. I am not a very charitable person on the spot and would have refused him if he had asked. I feel there is a difference between supporting charities with my time and simply giving out cash to people, especially cash that is not really mine to give out. Instead the man asked if we would do him a huge favor to which I inquired what it was.

He basically wanted me to find shrooms and if I were to agree he would help us tremendously. The guy however, couldn’t stay on topic though. He declared that if we were to follow through with it he would give us grand spiritual powers. He demonstrated this by holding out his hand which presumably had invisible fire emitting from it. I didn’t care to deny his belief that his hand controlled fire. He went on to say that he was God and/or Christ and the God and/or Christ was speaking through his human body as if to convince us of the importance of his demand. He gave us a convincing case as to how he could be God and/or Christ. But I found myself unconvinced but decided not to question him on it.

After he was done with what could be considered a pitch he wanted to know if we would help him. I told him that we were going to see a movie in ten minutes and that we would have to do this later. He didn’t seem to accept that and so I asked where I could find these shrooms. He answered in ironic fashion that he had planted shrooms in my backpack. It was at this time that I became confused as to what he meant. If he had planted shrooms in my backpack what did he need me for? He said he would give me $30.00 if I assisted him in getting shrooms, or maybe he meant that he would sell them to us for $30.00. Either way, it didn’t make a whole lot of sense to me.

As I was still on the fence about this I asked if I could make a phone call to a friend and that I needed some time to think this over. He didn’t find this satisfactory and told me that if I were to call a friend it would bring demonic ruin to me and even more so to Ron since it was his phone. After playing along with this guy for a few minutes he found my lack of cooperation unsatisfactory and took off north on F Street.

After he was gone I quickly checked my backpack and found nothing unusual. It was later confirmed by Ron that the guy did not mess with my backpack during the conversation. Sure the guy was gone I went to the other side of the movie theater and asked for Ron’s phone. In my zeal for righteousness I called 911 and got the CHP computer which then informed me that all of their operators were busy. I then called the Davis Police Department using the information off Ron’s ID card. Calling the Davis Police Department number it took a few minutes to get to their operator to which I described the altercation.

They asked all the right questions and I provided a detailed account, almost as detailed as what I am writing right now. Since the movie was going to start in 10 minutes I request that a cop car go after the suspect and have a chat with him. This was complied with and I left the DPD to handle him.

It is unknown to me as to whether the DPD actually found him. If they had they would probably find him mentally unstable or having possessed or being under the influence of some drug. The odds are I believe is that the cops never found him, but I can find out later.

Now, I could have done a few things differently than what had occurred. I could have been a jerk and told him to scram immediately but then that could have caused a fight. I could have walked off, but then he might have followed. With these options I decided to locate myself right in front of the theater in front of a large group of witnesses. I also kept the conversation going for me to memorize his physical details and for potential line up purposes. But at times he even patted me on shoulder in a friendly manner.

As for reporting the individual I decided that if this guy were to hurt or cause injury to another on F street or elsewhere and I didn’t report it I would feel morally responsible. Ron concurred with this judgment. Also, I really had a great satisfaction in busting a druggie and possible drug dealer. I realized soon thereafter that if they caught the suspect the Court might require me to attend as a witness, even so I found that to be intriguing.

But it was also personal. This guy invoked religious arguments to try and convince me which is something I don’t take lightly. Both Ron and I are quite skilled in Christian thinking and this guy was annoying my moral sensibilities. It reminded me of an event in which Ron dealt with someone who was trying to sell off prophecies near a local church. It was later determined that he was not a registered prophet. During the conversation I almost thought that he seriously wanted us to exorcise demons or something to which I would reply that I would have to get a signed document from the dioceses in order to proceed. Thankfully this do not occur for it could have caused him even more anger. There are procedures after all. It was one of weirdest conversations I have ever had with a human being.

I would just like to say that drug dealers and those who are influenced by them are not part of a happy hippie world in which all is peacefull and full of harmony. Drugs and those who use them are part of a depressing, self destructive segment of society. It is dark, violent, threatening, and destroys people every day.

In any case Harry Potter V was well done but I would objectively give it a B grade. I found Ralph Fiennes to be the best character in the movie.

The Chavez Man

It is the beginning of the Summer Session II and things are generally uneventful in comparison to what has occurred in the recent past and will happen in the near future. It is the so called silence before the storm. I got word by scanning facebook accounts that James Schwab had been removed from Facebook which were followed by various GO supporters rejoicing. However, this was simply an error on their part as they hadn’t investigated Facebook as thoroughly as myself, in other words they didn’t spend two minutes to confirm it. I posted it on the Davis Wiki knowing Schwab would confirm or deny it. Whether or not Schwab uses Facebook is irrelevant to me or what I intent to do in the future, it’s just a nice little tool for recruiting purposes.

The Campaign for Spencer Higgins Draft is real. I should know, I am in the Facebook group and talk with Spencer indirectly on what’s going on. Those who doubt the seriousness of this situation will be surprised when the 410 form is filled out.

I picked up golf on Wednesday and granted I have clubs I will challenge the 18 holes to a duel. It would be a fine fight and the odds are against me but I am going through with it. Besides golf allows for the more exciting activity of using a go-cart and chatting about various things. If I score a 200 I will consider it a success.

Bowling is on the up swing, I find that I was able to get a higher score by bowling by myself in one lane all for myself. This is not to say that there weren’t others, but because it was going to close soon we got three separate lanes for ourselves. I got a 139 in less than 15 minutes.

The crew and I are also considering the purchasing of more powerful laser tag guns which will have chest plates and a visor which will allow me to lock onto a target for a perfect shot. We also have our light sabers ready to go for fencing practice.

As for the Empire Nation I am supposedly going to have some sort of session with the Director of Public Affairs today or next week, she hasn’t got back to me. Poor Ryan and Joe had an interesting chat and now have to modify their shows a little bit. I consider the whole experience good practice for the Fall granted I am able to keep the show around by that time.

During the last show I read an article and concluded that Chavez was a dictator. The article may have also said it, I don’t remember, but I am sure I said it. Shortly thereafter I got calls coming into the show saying I was wrong and brainwashed for called Chavez a dictator. As usual it’s the corporations who are feeding me such lies leading me to use my progressive slogan: “The Corporations!” Whenever there is a problem in America it’s always “The Corporations!” I suppose I watch too much South Park or perhaps I hear too many Liberals speak.

Now, I suppose I could Google Chavez but Google is a Corporation so that’s out. I could read a book but then that would be a publishing corporation. I could watch the news but all the news channels are corporations. I could read liberal blogs but then how would I know if the bloggers are not getting their sources from corporations. I could take quotes from politicians but they also use corporations for their news and information. I suppose I will have to drive to Venezuela to find out the truth of the matter. Unfortunately for the Chavez supporters I am too low class to afford such a thing. And then there is Wikipedia which is the Source of All Truth and is a non-profit enterprise.

Is Chavez a dictator? I suppose it depends on perceptions. There is still a legislative branch and some independents in the press. He still has term limits which will probably be abolished soon. Chavez’s model is Cuba, no mistake about it. He will become a dictator just like Fidel Castro if he is not stopped.

More importantly Chavez is an enemy to the United States. He has done everything possible to antagonize the United States politically and economically. The reason gas prices are so high is due in some part to him. Socialism will never work in any country. His country will become poorer than before and there will be a coup just as there was before. I am not too concerned about Chavez because capitalism will always win in the end; it’s just a matter of time. But until people realize this the Venezuelan people will continue to suffer.

So how does this fit in with my progressive nature? Democratic politicians have come out and accused Chavez of being a dictator and are acting more hawkish towards Chavez. One can be progressive and not be a communist. I think I can create the distinction on the show where is a conservative cannot. After all only a liberal can destroy another liberal.

In the meantime read some of Google’s finest searches and you will see what I mean.

http://www.dictatorofthemonth.com/Chavez/Jun2005ChavezEN.htm

http://www.venezuelanalysis.com/news.php?newsno=1265

http://www.capmag.com/article.asp?ID=4199

http://www.newsmax.com/archives/ic/2005/7/18/131555.shtml

ASUCD Commission Behavior

In the Associated Students of the University California Davis or ASUCD, there are 7 commissions with at least 11 members in each one. The legislative branch of ASUCD includes the Internal Affairs Commission, Academic Affairs Commission, Ethnic and Cultural Affairs Commission, Gender and Sexuality Commission, Business and Finance Commission, External Affairs Commission, and the Environmental Policy and Planning Commission. They all have 9 voting members and at least two alternates although occasionally one may have 1 alternate while another may have three alternates. Commissions that have more than two earn my compliments while those who have less earn my lawsuits.

In order to get on a commission you have to fill out an application form that has your contact information and a description of your experience and qualifications. You should fill out a paper form and an electronic form because either or both can be lost by the system. Granted the chair gives you a call for an interview, (not always the case), you can become interviewed for the positions.

Most of the questions for the interview are vague and thus you could talk forever on your life story before they stop you. Other questions are more specific as to whether you truly have any experience in the field you wish to be involved in. Some questions are stupid though like what is your favorite actor, color, sports team, etc. How you answer this question may establish how human you are.

The interviewing committee consists of two Senators, a commission chair of the commission the applicant is applying for, a commissioner from the commission the applicant is applying for, and another commission chair of another commission. Legally the interview team can be made up of four people but the absent one must be a Senator. If there is less than one Senator or less than four members the interview process is illegal and the Court could rule that the interview process is void. This happened for my interview and so my External Affairs Commission position was unconstitutional.

In most cases active students, even freshmen can get on commissions. I have seen myself passed over by freshmen who know zip about the system. Then there are those who are selected because they are well connected or friends with those in power. Those that rebel against the system tend not to do so well.

Then the Senate usually rubber stamps what the interview committee judges. There have been some small controversies but I have never seen someone not confirmed until just recently with the Gender and Sexuality Commission.

In the commissions as I have observed there are different groups of people. There are the conservative establishment people, the rebels, and the wise men. The Conservatives are not politically conservative; they support the status quo and their way of doing things. They tend to have more experience, have greater arrogance, and are usually promoted to chair or Senate later on. The Conservatives often need to know what they are doing so that the Rebels don’t get the upper hand.

The Rebels are those who introduce legislation on the idea that they are the minority on the commission. They hope for the rare chance that the wise men will side with them against the Conservatives. They often have more fun than the Conservatives because they don’t take the process as seriously. They are liberal only when it comes to what they want done which is a lot of different changes. They may also hope to regress ASUCD back to a more glorious state. The Rebels tend to not promote anywhere within the association but hope for the day when they will rule over the Conservatives. The Rebels and Conservatives are generally experts on ASUCD processes.

The Wise Men never speak during Commission meetings. If you look at the minutes they have zero quotes. They are generally hard working on projects and writing reports but they have little to nothing to say about legislation. They are unpredictable as far as determining how they will vote but they tend to vote with the Conservatives. The Wise Men may know a great deal but this can never be determined and as such people sometimes get the impression that they know nothing about the system. They prove that one can still contribute to a debate without saying a word. They tend to not have as much fun as the Rebels or the Conservatives. They also tend to never promote and are generally content with their position.

Every once in a while accusations of cronyism are thrown around. This accusation is hard to prove and hard to defend which makes it a convenient attack. The story of Greg Webb does not surprise me at all. I aimed him randomly about running for ASUCD Senate in the Fall of 2006 and he agreed but he didn’t collect enough signatures. He managed to secure enough in the Winter of 2007 and joined the Student Focus slate after briefly being with ACT. After his loss in the Winter of 2007, Greg visited the Internal Affairs Commission frequently, and would later comment to me on what he thought of the meeting. He even wrote a letter to the editor commenting on a piece of legislation from IAC and every so often went to Senate meetings. While this was going on Greg Webb and I discussed the possibility of an ASUCD radio talk show on KDVS for the Fall quarter. The idea that he isn’t qualified or that he deserves last place is not surprising to me concerning status quo but is somewhat appalling to me. I fully expect Mr. Webb to be involved in some interesting things on the start of the fall quarter. As said above, Greg made the mistake of being a rebel.

Libertarian and Republican Connection

For most people there is the Republican Party and then there is the Democratic Party. Third party organizations have a difficult time winning high offices but on occasion surprise us by winning local city council elections and challenging the two major parties.

The Libertarian Party is the third largest political party in the United States with over 200,000 members and 600 elected officials nationwide. Compared to the two major parties this might not seem like much but there are occasions when Third parties can make a significant difference. In 2000 Al Gore lost the presidential election in large part to Ralph Nader in Florida. Republican Presidential Candidate Ron Paul once ran for president in 1988 under the Libertarian Party.

Why does Ron Paul have such great popularity with the young people? A lot of it has to do with the fact that students and young people behave very much like Libertarians when it comes to their political views. Many students who consider themselves liberal Democrats are actually Libertarians; they simply don’t consider themselves as such. Students seem to have this government hands off mentality and for good reason. Students don’t like regressive taxes; entitlement spending that doesn’t benefit them, budget deficits that they will eventually have to pay, and greater government involvement in their lives.

The Republican and the Libertarian view points collide on several points and I desire to list these points as I interpret the Republican and Libertarian mindset. I will further prove that an ultra-liberal socialist cannot be under Libertarian definition be a true Libertarian leader.

Libertarians favor tax breaks whether it be income tax, sales tax, social security tax, any kind of tax. Republicans agree as it has been shown with the Republican Ford administration, the Reagan administration, and the George W Bush administration. The Republican Congress during the years of 1995 to 2007 enthusiastically supported tax breaks and even under a Democratic controlled Congress Republicans were able to negotiate a small business tax cut in order to pass a higher minimum wage. On the California state level Republicans have generally been supportive of tax breaks and have always opposed tax increases. Governor Schwarzenegger vowed he would never raise taxes and has succeeded. In Davis however there have been constant tax increases under a progressive population and Davis City Council. There has been Measure O, P, and G which have increases taxes on the Davis population.

Libertarians favor greater economic freedom to develop and oppose government regulations. Republicans and Libertarians alike have supported greater growth in cities and have shown themselves to have a pro-business mentality. This is good, because it is business that keeps this nation as prosperous as it is, not the government. Those that opposed Measure K are not Libertarians where is those that did are more in agreement to Libertarian view.

Libertarians promote greater property rights and oppose eminent domain seizures. Republicans pushed for Proposition 90 which would have given greater compensation and protection to property owners. It failed but it was worth a shot.

Libertarians oppose taxation of religious institutions and many Republicans and myself agree. Religious organization should continue to have non-profit status and Republicans and Libertarians would be more agreeable to having welfare services flow through charity organizations than the wasteful government.

Libertarians and Republicans both agree when it comes to gun ownership. Democrats and progressives have put a great many restrictions on rural areas when it comes to purchasing various weapons. Both political parties consider the 2^nd Amendment seriously while some liberal judges have ruled that the 2^nd Amendment doesn’t even pertain to citizens.

Libertarians and Republicans agree on greater free trade. Free trade allows us to sell stuff and buy stuff from the world without restriction or tax from the government. It strengthens the economies of the Third World and makes things cheaper for us here in the United States. It doesn’t balance out the economic circumstances of the world but rather it increases capitalism and investment in the world. There is no zero sum game. The more money you have the more stuff you can do with it.

Libertarians and some Republicans have been tireless fighters of budget deficits and have decried the incredible spending under George W Bush. The amount of spending comes close to Lyndon Johnson’s Great Society programs. This kind of spending needs to be lowered in order to bring about a balanced budget. If we do not, the expense of the interest alone will hurt my generation and the generation beyond me.

When in comes to Social Security both parties agree that this institution needs to be privatized if it is to stay functional decades into the future. If it remains as it is more economic pressure will be put on the shoulders of my generation and future generations.

And finally the Republicans and Libertarians agree that we must have a secure border in order to protect the property rights of US citizens and to prevent run away spending of social programs on undocumented persons. Though these parties may disagree as to how much security is needed but they do agree on the fundamental principle that our social programs should not be held hostage by uncontrolled borders.

There are some obvious differences between Republicans and Libertarians but there are also many similarities. As such it is my belief that the two parties can work together when it comes to certain specific issues. When it comes to the city of Davis I fear that the 160 registered Libertarians and 7,000 Republicans are being ignored. Libertarians should identify that in city politics Republican social conservatism is rarely an issue but Republican economic policy is what is most important on the city level.

When it comes to myself I have disagreements on Libertarians on certain issues but I have more meaningful similarities. The two issues that have been brought before me is my ASUCD record on two bills I hope to and “will” pass; that being the So Help Me God oath of office bill and the Pledge of Allegiance.

It can be acknowledged that Libertarians believe in the Separation of Church and State but I feel that I need to give Senator-elect the public freedom to express whether they wish to say it or not and have that recognized. As I have said before ASUCD is not a state, it is an association. Those who oppose my bill have a more tyrannical nature in that they hope to silence religion in ASUCD and this was one step to do it. As for the Pledge of Allegiance I also consider this to be freedom issue. People should have the freedom to recite it and have it recognized under the system. It’s completely voluntary and I don’t see why it shouldn’t be a part of an association that is heavily entangled with the federal and state government. Even so, these two bills are minimally important in the grand scheme of things.

Now, I could change all of my positions to make everyone happy but that would insult the intelligence of the people and it would be flip flopping on the issues which I shall not do. Instead I believe that I need to keep the principles that I believe in but be open to new information and act accordingly. There is a difference between someone who acts like a fake to get an endorsement and someone who stands firm and gains respect from the general people. Despite my opposition to Giuliani’s positions I do find it respectable that he keeps to his positions and states to all those who listen, “This is who I am and you can either vote for me or not.” You can change your mind of course, but never change your political soul.

ASUCD TASER Resolution and Petition

It seems I have run into some trouble with my latest blog over the various things I had to say about Senator Andrew Peake, but before I can go into “greater” detail about Sen. Peake it has become necessary to clear up this insignificant issue.

The resolution in question is ASUCD resolution #8 of the 2006-2007 school year. It was written byPeake, co-authored by Laabs, and introduced by Peake. The Vice President, Genna Carnes, decided to send the resolution to Ethnic and Cultural Affairs. I thought this was a mistake and that it implied that the UCLA police officers acted in a racist manner which was not the case. Even the independent investigation that was revealed on August 2^nd, 2007 confirmed that racial bias was not a factor in the case. So why was it sent to this commission other than to make a statement? It went to the proper commission, that being the External Affairs Commission and then it went to the ASUCD Senate. In both commissions, the ECAC and EAC, I gave reservations concerning the resolutions. These reservations were not implemented but I am not shedding tears over the matter.

The first clause of the resolution states that Mostafa Tabatabainejad was tasered multiple times while non-violently resisting. I will agree that he was tasered multiple times. Some say he was shocked three times and other say it was four of five. The number of times is not overwhelming concerning to me. The part of the resolution I disagree with is that the suspect who I will from now on name “Mr. T” was not a non-violent suspect. He was screaming and yelling the whole time and requested that the other students around him assist him which I consider to be an inciting of the people around him. Non-violence gives the impression that he was some sort of Gandhi or Martin Luther King figure who committed acts of civil disobedience and are then calmly taken away. This guy was an idiot and he was asking for it.

The second clause states that the police used excessive force as if it were fact. You can’t have a resolution calling for an independent investigation and then at the same time make certain conclusions. You can’t conclude the suspect was non-violent and you can’t conclude that the police were excessive until the independent investigation is finished. The UCLA police department’s own investigation in which they hired outside people determined that the TAZER was not inappropriately used. Furthermore the police department dropped the case on the officers.

I also dispute within the second clause that it was the police that disturbed the peaceful environment of the library. Mr. T did by arguing with the security guard and then resisting the police. The police did their jobs and it was Mr. T who should receive the blame for his actions. The second independent investigation that Mr. Peake will use to justify his case also said that Mr. T was partly responsible for the incident and caused himself trouble when he didn’t have to.

In the first Therefore clause the resolution states that it “supports” an independent investigation and does not “call” for an independent investigation. This is one of those clauses where one can basically ride the success of circumstances already happening. If ASUCD were to “call” for an independent investigation they would have been ignored and then there would have been some evidence to suggest that no one cared what ASUCD thought.

In fact if you check any Internet search engine you will not find one news article or website that combines ASUCD with the independent investigation on the UCLA police incident except for ASUCD information material and the California Aggie. The Independent Investigation was jump started on November 19, 2006, fives days after the incident occurred. The ASUCD resolution was passed on December 7^th.

The resolution was not really radical in anyway, it didn’t call for an end to TASER weapons nor did it call for the resignation of any one officer. It didn’t obnoxiously call the officers racist like the UCSA did. I hereby call this resolution the “forgotten” one.

I personally appreciate former Sen. Rosas-Romero’s efforts on the subject because they are much more radical and promote ideas that are a lot bolder. The first part of her “petition” is to ban TASER weapons from UC campuses. The alternative to the TASER weapon is a baton. Allow me to describe this weapon. In the old days they would be made out of solid wood and were painted black. Although they could cause high amounts of pain they could break on occasion and were not as effective as they could be. Then a new baton came out which was made out of metal and plastic. They were short but extendable batons where one pushed a button releasing a metal shaft. This was much more painful, sturdy, and more effective. When you have a violent suspect this weapon causes a greater deal of pain and injury then a TASER. Another alternative is tear gas or pepper spray which by far is more painful to the sensitive eyes than a TASER weapon. Without the TASER the police would have had to use physical force to drag the suspect out of the library. The TASER is the safest way for the officer and for the suspect in almost all cases. Those against the TASER are losing the battle of ideals. More cities have TASERS now and whenever there is a complaint against them police departments purchase more developed ones. Normal citizens can now buy TASER weapons. You wouldn’t refuse citizens to buy TASERS for self defense would you?

I also have issues with the third clause which states that UCLA should have had other means to identify the suspect even if he didn’t have his ID card. Fact remains is that he did have his ID card and refused to show it. What was the security guard supposed to do at 11pm at night? Call his friends, use a finger printer machines, how about an eye code? He didn’t have any right being there if he wasn’t a student. Under UCLA policy you have to be a student to be there at the library. This is to protect students from people wandering onto the campus and possible threats. By restricting non-students from facilities it reduces violence and sexual assaults on these campuses, it’s a reasonable policy.

The fourth clause wants an independent review board at all UC police departments. That’s the answer to everything is a police review board. There must always be multiple boards actively attacking and harassing the police. These boards would be for the most part a waste of time and money because except for very rare occurrences there are no complaints.

The fifth clause demands that all charges should be dropped on Mr. T. This has probably already been done not because he is innocent but because the police and the district attorney don’t want to touch him after the controversial incident. Personally, he should be charged if he broke the law regardless of officer conduct.

I don’t like resolutions that already support status quo because then you simply ride the success of systems already in place. I don’t like resolutions that do not have follow up attached or are too obnoxious for a normal official to take seriously. I do not believe in resolutions designed to pander to some base or divide the student community. For the most part I have come to dislike resolutions all together except for the academic ones which are non-partisan, non-controversial, and actually work towards all students’ interests. I tried to pass a resolution on Measure K and it failed miserably but I won anyway. I tried to introduce a resolution on Proposition 83 which was passed by California voters overwhelmingly despite the insane opposition that came out of the ACLU.

Sen. Peake Seeks Reelection

It is becoming more apparent that Andrew Peake is running for reelection to the ASUCD Senate in the Fall 2007 Election. It is unusual for a Senator to run for reelection, I cannot recall a time when a Senator successfully ran for reelection. George Ajlouny may have broken some historic ground by running for reelection in the Winter of 2007, one year after he had been elected to the Senate in the Winter of 2006.

Andrew Peake is either a summer advisor or he likes to hang out with new freshmen. In any case he is campaigning among them in order to create higher visibility for himself. Being a summer advisor is an old but effective campaign trick to get freshmen on one’s side for an election. Freshmen don’t forget who their summer advisors are, except for maybe me.

Which begs the question as to whether it is entirely ethical to be campaigning while a summer advisor. I would say that it is as long as it doesn’t interfere with your job. The same goes for being an RA, there are perks for every occupation in society. A cop has a better chance of winning the Police association’s endorsement for Sheriff then someone who isn’t.

But what has Mr. Peake done in Senate that is of considerable significance that he should be allowed a reelection? There is the gender-neutral bathrooms resolution he had passed which pandered to the LGBT base of the LEAD party. Then there was the resolution calling for an independent investigation on a TASERing incident at UCLA. The independent investigation has not formed and nothing happened. Then there was the resolution in support of Sodexho which ultimately proved to be unwise as Sodexho employees decided to declare war on the campus.

I also remember Mr. Peake voting down a carefully crafted resolution authored by Senator Friedman which would allow UC Davis students to visit places like Israel and still get university credit. Then Mr. Peake voted down a small spending bill of $180 towards the Hillel House retreat, a bill also authored by Senator Friedman. Suffice to say Mr. Peake’s voting record is not all that friendly towards the political objectives of the vocal Jewish community.

Mr. Peake also made enemies among friends when he vocally slammed the Newman Center Tijuana House spending bill decrying the fact that it was a religious organization asking for funds. Due to Mr. Peake’s antics the meeting lasted over two hours and was finally passed when the Senate unanimously decided to give the Newman Center a grant and a loan. Mr. Peake is such great palls with the Hispanic community during the May 1^st march but couldn’t give the Newman Center a dime to assist poverty stricken Mexican families in Tijuana.

All of these things cause me great frustration but the Aggie also should be blamed for its biased reporting. Every time there is an incident concerning a conservative it’s Mr. Peake with a solution or a comment. He commented about me several times even when he was not directly involved and he had loads of fun with Pete Markevich who was involved in the DCR demonstration on May 1^st. According to the Aggie, Peake is a saint who also happened to promote civil disobedience and Markevich is the lowest of the lows for participating in a street theater that didn’t even get started.

But once school starts up again in September the Aggie will be recharged and ready to go. With Peake announcing his intentions to run now it provides some very interesting opportunities. As such I have developed a game plan as to how to move in this election game. By the time the ASUCD elections have started up I will be in a much greater position to influence the game. The students need to know about Mr. Peake and I am all too delighted to be their teacher.

I Supported Measure K

In June of 2006 the City Council decided to hand over the fate of Target to the voters or the “mob” as James Schwab would derisively comment. At the time I felt the Davis City Council should have made the decision itself. That is why they are elected to the council in the first place. In Redding we never had these large ballot battles over development, the council always decided.

If another future development like Target comes to Davis the council should decide on the question instead of tearing the community apart. City Council members have great access to staff, legal and environmental scholars, developer testimony, and so on. They are in the best position to decide these issues and indeed four out of the five of the council members sided with Target.

I also thought that it was rather inappropriate on the City Council’s part to make a decision on Target during the interim period between the June 2006 election and when City Council members are sworn in. This silenced Target as a political issue in the race because the new City Council members would have no say on the decision. It also shielded the existing City Council from damage. Although politically smart it is quite shady.

Target quickly mobilized resources to campaign on the issue. They rented out a suite in order to promote their campaign and gave out free t-shirts. Along with a professional website and professional people imported from other places they were ready to go. I joined the Target campaign in the Fall of 2006 until the end on the election day.

The Target store had many advantages that were seemingly ignored by the opposition. Target would bring considerable income into the City of Davis and would continue to expand as the years went by. The city at the time was too dependent on the University Mall for sales tax revenue. The Target would also provide products that could not be found in Davis and they were at cheaper prices. This would be very advantageous for students and for families.

The Target also had a Unitrans bus route that would pass along side it. It had an electrical outlet for electrical cars, crosswalks for pedestrians, and was convenient for West and South Davis residents as far as location was concerned.

The Target store was classified as a LEED bronze which is a very difficult rating to get. Only three buildings in the US had such a classification proving that it was the best environmental alternative. It was to be surrounded by trees to make it look nice and its size would block out undesirable traffic from the major highways in the area.

Critics pointed out the possibility of shop lifting but the police chief, who happened to endorse the project, debunked that theory as alarmist. Critics also said there would be a dramatic increase in traffic while at the same time declaring the store would close down due to a lack of business. The truth of the matter is that many people were burning fuel driving to Woodland to get their stuff. It is best to keep tax revenue in Davis instead of it being sent off to places like Dixon, Woodland, and Sacramento.

The alternative to Target would be a warehouse or a car lot. Now, car lots provide a lot of money to the city but not as much as Target. If one looks at the environment Target was the best plan. Some complained that the character of Davis would be forever changed despite the fact that box stores like Ace Hardware, Safeway, Borders, and Office Depot are already here. My point is that Target would do much better for Davis’ character than an open field where nothing happens.

So, all things considered, I volunteered quite a bit. I phone banked, delivered signs, precinct walked, made Facebook groups, argued on the Davis Wiki, held up signs on Election Day, and other small tasks. Was it momentous action? Probably not, but it did put a strain on my schedule and it was more than some other City Council candidates ever did.

In ASUCD I tried to pass a resolution in favor of Target which was introduced by an enthused Spencer Higgins (other Senators refused). It went through the proper channels of going to the External Affairs Commission. The EAC under Mike Lay’s command failed it unanimously. And it wasn’t like the resolution was bad format or content wise. I made changes as they were suggested. It was apparent however that the commission knew very little about the project and was confused by the presence of Lamar Heystek and Rob Roy. Those two fought against the resolution as I argued all the points that I could muster. Heystek had the usual tendency to go over time with his comments. Mike Lay didn’t decide to enforce time limits until I spoke a second time and only after I complained about it. James Schwab said that the resolution should fail due to its divisive nature on the students even though he wrote in his blog that he favored the project. After the resolution had failed it went to the Environmental Planning and Policy Commission. It was also voted down unanimously even as I had victoriously announced that Measure K had won. I was informed by Dan Xie who was the chair of EPPC that Measure K was in fact not environmentally sound. So it never went to Senate and the Senate never had a vote on the subject.

The EAC instead voted unanimously in favor of SMUD which was glorified by Heystek, Roy, and then Senator Salem. Interestingly SMUD was apparently more divisive as it failed in Sacramento and Woodland and barely passed in Davis. That resolution went on to pass unanimously in the Senate. Problem in judging political climate? Perhaps, but I wasn’t alone on this Target issue. President Darnell Holloway was a supporter of Measure K and would have signed into law a measure supporting Measure K. When the election was over Measure K had won with 51.5% of the vote. I won but ASUCD, Heystek, Greenwald, Roy, the EAC, and EPPC were all wrong.

The battle over Target didn’t end after the passage of Measure K. In his zeal to destroy Target Heystek introduced an ordinance that it would increase the minimum wage on retail stores to the same level as Safeway. This would have hurt Target and it was his intention to drive them out of business or at least punish them for wanting to come here. He was defeated by the other four City Council members but he already knew that was going to happen; he wanted to make a political statement.

I must oppose, for obvious reasons, legislation that is designed to destroy business in Davis. There is a way to deal with a certain issue and one cannot punish corporations in order to bring about prosperity. I hope to see Target open in 2009; it should be an exciting day for many residents. Those who voted against Measure K will surely change their minds upon seeing the benefits. But it really needs to be said that City Council candidates: Mike Levy, Lamar Heystek, Stan Forbes, and Rob Roy were all wrong on Target but Ruth Asmundson was right and that is to her credit. Perhaps that is one of the many reasons she got the most votes in the June 2006 election.

Spencer Higgins Draft

On July 24^th some friends and acquaintances came up with this neat idea to draft Spencer Higgins into the City Council race of 2008. The first step was to create a Facebook group which was to be secret until it hit a certain amount of members. The enthusiasm among Higgin’s friends was undeniable as the group has now surpassed 120 people despite it being a secret group. I have had conversations with people who are enthused by this possible candidacy and with good reason.

Spencer Higgins is aware of the existence of the group but is not a member and does not have access to the group itself. This is after all a draft, and many of us hope to gently push Higgins into the race due to our support for his ideals and past works. Higgins will be interning in Washington DC for the Fall Quarter and so for the time being he will be researching City politics and communication with important people on the possibility of a run. Once he comes back in January he will be able to give a definitive yes or no on the question. But for the time being he is merely “testing the waters.” Any implication that it is beyond that would be inaccurate.

Spencer Higgins ran for ASUCD Senate in the Fall of 2004 as an Independent showing early interest in the ASUCD process. He successfully won a Senate seat under Student Focus in the Fall of 2005. Before becoming elected he was an Academic Affairs Commissioner and Senate intern. In the Winter of 2007 Spencer Higgins was a presidential candidate for ASUCD. He was at the same time a pro-Unitrans campaign worker. During his time at UC Davis Higgins was a Theta XI member and become the Philanthropy Chair. Higgins has held internships with Governor Schwarzenegger and will soon become an intern in Washington DC. There are probably other associations and activities that Higgins has been involved in that I am ignorant of, but I am certain that he has the governmental experience to quickly learn complex processes.

Chairing the draft is enthusiastic supporter Wenche Molenaar who used to be the ASUCD Gender and Sexuality Commission Chair and who now works for the Rudy Giuliani campaign. For the time being our goal is to get the message out on Higgin’s personality, intentions, and past activities. There will be a time when it will be appropriate to advance specific policy goals but not at this particular point. It should be noted that I have my own opinions and Higgins has his own. We are separate individuals with separate opinions on the issues. I can comment on the draft and what I personally think but I only speak for myself.

If Higgins does run and that’s a big IF he would be one of the youngest candidates if not the youngest candidate to run for City Council. He would also be a student during this time which means he would have daily interaction with students who may have concerns about their city. We can take the policy questions people have and come up with answers. So, if you happen to get an invite please join the group and then invite your friends into the group as well. This could be a new revolutionary beginning to how students interact with the city.

Davis Police

Here in Davis we have two police departments, that being the Davis Police Department and the UC Davis Police Department. The UC Davis Police Department has jurisdiction over the campus and sections of West Davis. The Davis Police Department covers everywhere else but the two departments often work together.

Every election the subject of police comes up. Should we fund them more? Should we have more oversight? Should we create more committees and commissions to discuss the supposed problems of racial profiling and discrimination? Should we lecture the police on how they handle individual cases in our community? As usual in politics candidates make grand promises to the people and then find themselves unable to solve the problem. This is because there is only so much one council member can do concerning the problem and a lack of motivation by others.

It is probably true that the present City Council incumbents and probable challengers have more experience than me in how to work with the Davis Police Department. They may claim their years of interaction and communication with the Police Department but the thing they lack is vision and life experience.

My father is a Sergeant in the Redding Police Department. He was originally a Pasadena cop and then transferred to Redding in 1988 and has been a police officer ever since. He will retire in January of 2009 at the age of 50 after serving Redding for 20 years. Throughout my life time my father was a patrol officer, investigator, head investigator, SWAT team member, corporal, sergeant, and will go back to patrol within the year. During my life time I have read police reports, made acquaintances with several officers, shot different types of weapons, ride alongs, and I’ve been to the department quite frequently. My father had a tendency to bring his work home with him and I was naturally interested in the types of crimes that he was working on.

It was during this time that I found myself respecting the power of a firearm. I would on occasion go to the police range and I wasn’t bad at shooting. I would often shoot 9mm, .45 cal, .40 cal, and 380 cal. My favorite was the .380 even though it was a rather small gun. I could shoot one handed, left handed, it didn’t matter as far as I was concerned. I also had the opportunity to fire M16 rifles, MP5 submachine gun, and 12 gauge shotguns at various differences. When it comes to these weapons you can’t have a Hollywood attitude. These weapons are indeed powerful and it was with frequent practice with them that I learned their importance in police.

It is said that many people do not like the idea of SWAT teams having submachine guns, sniper rifles, shock bombs, pepper spray bombs, and so on. The truth of the matter is that a SWAT team is the least likely to kill a suspect armed or unarmed in a given situation; the SWAT team moves so fast that the criminal is arrested before he knows what hits him. Contrary to conventional thinking a cop is the most dangerous when he is alone with a suspect in a car. This is not to say that the cop is an enemy, but the kind of shootouts that do occur usually happen when a cop is the most vulnerable. A heavily armed police force is a force that brings more peace and tranquility to a community. As contradictory as that sounds it is the truth.

This is not to say that Davis needs a SWAT team nor can it afford one. This is a small town where violent crime is rather rare. As such a SWAT team would not be necessary but in the event we did have a SWAT team, be rest assured that the ACLU and other ultra liberal anti authoritarian groups would be protesting in the streets. It’s not because they actually feel threatened by a SWAT team but they simply don’t like police power due to their irrational anarchist political feelings.

There was a complaint on the Davis Wiki that cops were upgrading their weapons to assault rifles instead of shotguns. There was some hysteria that this was a bad thing for cops to upgrade their weapons; that we were becoming a police state of sort. The fact of the matter is that rifles are safer than shotguns because shot guns spray pellets all over the place and are not practical long range. A rifle bullet also tends to shatter upon impact upon hitting a wall but a pistol bullet will go through the wall. As such in close urban environments a pistol is more dangerous than a rifle. Too many anti-authoritarians see these high power rifles as a threat due to their ignorance and anti-police feelings. You would think that some of these people would desire to disarm all cops of any weapon.

And so the issues concerning the police are as follows. The police budget continues to expand year after year which is not all too surprising. The City of Davis pays its police department 13 million dollars or 140% more money than the entire ASUCD budget. This money is necessary for personal and equipment. As the town grows the police needs more money and there is also the problem of inflation and wage increases. Davis also needs to stay competitive because if we don’t pay cops the market amount we will lose them to towns like Dixon and so on. JJ Charlesworth, a candidate for Davis City Council in 2004 was wrong to want to cut the police budget. The Chief of Police righteously said that Charlesworth was uninformed on police issues. Perhaps Charlesworth was betting on cynical Davis residents who would be willing to vote for him based on that one issue.

There are the constant accusations of racial profiling that are always brought up by the anti-authoritarian groups. Cops are not paid more nor do they receive an incentive for racial profiling. In most cases cops arrest based on calls and complaints they receive. The problem seems to be is whether a cop pulls someone over simply because the person is a minority. So, if there isn’t a police policy concerning minorities then it must be the individual officers. It has been alleged that Davis must be recruiting racist cops, how else can we explain these happenings? But the fact of the matter is that there is a point of view problem. If you are a cop you pull people over all the time and see hundreds of faces a year during the term of your work. A minority suspect on the other hand only experiences getting pulled over once in four years and is stunned by the experience. This difference in perspective causes a lot of confusion among civilians. People make such a big deal over statistics. If minorities are arrested more often than their population percentage allegations of racial profiling are thrown about. What needs to be realized is that perhaps people are arrested due to their actions regardless of race. There are several other reasons for these stats. There is racial inequality due to economic, cultural, geographical, and circumstantial reasons. These inequalities can in some cases greater frequency of crimes. To say that minorities are arrested with greater frequency is due to racist cops is an oversimplification of the issue.

If a cop pulls you over it’s probably for a reason outside of your race. Will a cop pull someone over for a minor technicality on your car? It happens all the time and the cop may do just that if he has a slight suspicion that he may find more violations upon having a chat with the owner of the car. You will find that cops like to have conversations with a possible suspect to gather information; they will stop you in mid-sentence before you ask for a lawyer, and they will give you a coke, cigarettes, and other types of compliments as they chat with you. I have been told that cigarettes are a cop’s best friend in interrogation rooms.

Students also tend to complain against the cops for the enforcement of noise violations. Let us be clear. The vast amounts of students are law abiding citizens who do not have to deal with noise violations or the police in general. But on occasion you have a noisy party and the police are called out. The police come to parties not because they want to but due to a complaint. That means that a neighbor was annoyed and called the cops. On most occasions cops do not give citations but merely warn parties that they are too noisy. In some of these parties you have underage drinking and on rare occasions drug use. This cannot stand in a law abiding society and you should be busted if you engage in such actions. Sometimes you have students who actively insult and fight with the police over noise violations. This does not help relations between police and students. Are some cops jerks on occasion, yes, it happens. Are students jerks to police, yes, it happens as well. We are all human beings, but there is no trend or policy for cops to act like jerks towards students.

Now as far as abuse in Davis, if you compare us to other cities we are pretty well off. Every abuse listed on the Davis Wiki can be explained away with a clear understanding of the events and police policy. We do not have an abusive police, period.

In ASUCD there are leaders who have made statements against the police and actively fight the police. These same leaders are a walking contradiction. Senator Peake works for the ACLU, a notoriously anti-police organization, so as to create ties between students and police. On the other hand he promotes and marches in the May 1^st rally which advocates civil disobedience against the City of Davis to which cops have to show up and put people on buses. You have James Schwab, who invented the ASUCD Police Relations Committee, telling a fellow student to close a door on a police officer’s face to prevent the officer from seeing under aged drinking. The Police Relations Committee he was in charge of never got off the ground despite the fact that I applied for it and some other people I personally knew applied for it. He didn’t like me politically so he shut it down for six months despite the fact that I have two decades of police experience.

ASUCD passed a resolution in favor a Police Relations Committee made up of seven individuals. These individuals would be appointed by the City Council, the Police Chief, and ASUCD; the resolution was written by Rob Roy. The Senate didn’t get the police side of the story or the City’s side of the story mainly because it was an urgent resolution decided around 11pm. In the resolution they used the Halema case to justify their proposal. The City shot it down in large part because the Senate was not properly informed on the Halema case. Don Saylor famously voiced his opposing feelings on the issue. The ASUCD then used this response to say that the City Council was out of touch with the student body and further bashed the police. The truth is that the students didn’t vote for their leaders to make uninformed judgments in the form of an emergency resolution. The City Council and I were right, ASUCD was not. As this was occurring ASUCD created a new a police relations committee which, surprise, doesn’t function either. Why do these committees fail? It could have a lot to do with their being a total lack of complaints.

With the Halema case the District Attorney (then and now), the City Council, and the Davis Police Department believed that Police Officer Ly was in the right. Even City Council candidate Mike Levy stated that the police were technically correct and that people shouldn’t jump to conclusions. The City felt so strongly that they awarded Ly Officer of the Year. If one listens to the tape and the evidence it is clear that Ly was polite and professional. He was not racist, abusive, or an authoritarian jerk. There is some dispute over whether he continued to question Halema even though she wanted a lawyer. Although it may go against police policy to continue questioning someone after they ask for a lawyer it really isn’t that big of a deal. Any statements she makes after desiring a lawyer would simply be thrown out of court. One of the first meetings I was involved in ASUCD had James Schwab presenting his case about Halema and the police. Upon reflecting back on that April 2006 presentation I found much of what he said to be inaccurate. Halema and her family ruthlessly attacked Officer Ly, sued the Davis Enterprise, and then sued the Police Department after being busted for a hit and run and I am supposed to just let that go?

The City Council needs to have the leadership to defend the police, our own troops, from the attacks of anti-authoritarian groups that have an axe to grind against all police institutions. Groups like the ACLU side with criminals, child molesters, sex offenders, terrorists, murderers, and fight the police at every opportunity. They fight against the non-lethal TAZER and hopes to one day disarm the police entirely. They fight for anarchy and the destruction of an orderly society because they are crazy but also because they have a warped view of the world. We need a city council that will defend the police from these loons and we need a city council that will publicly fight back. We need a city council that will engage with ASUCD and educate ASUCD about the police, not just make chiding statements at 10:45pm on a Tuesday when no one is listening. It will be a disaster if an anti-police candidate wins in a city council election.

Only a pro-police city council candidate will have the experience and influence to make change. But the anti-authoritarians have weakened us. They have cost us the Chief of Police (he resigned) as well as four officers who also resigned. The Human Relations Committee’s constant attack of the police is inappropriate and it really served them right when the City Council disbanded them.

I know that the silent majority of Davis residents and students support the police. The question is whether they will allow the minority of anti-authoritarians to win in 2008.