Reply #58: I dunno, but [View All]

I don't know where else one gets their news--I rely on radio news, KCBS out of S.F. But these two articles pretty much sum up what I know--

http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/c/a/2004/08/26/MNG088EKH61.DTL

http://abclocal.go.com/kgo/story?section=i_team&id=3313781

I think it takes chutzpah to suggest a grand jury indictment in the Bay area is part of a republican conspiracy (Terrance Hallinan is not my idea of a conservative); or not mention it at all, and make a bigger deal of abrasive relations with staff--one could not get away with this alone with a senate and assembly comprised of a democratic majority.

Which I suspect that this is what you might be referring to as non MSM news:

http://www.voteamericavote.com/shelley.html.

Which is a nasty statement regarding the situation with Bill Jones office (well, far nastier than what I averred to).

We can continue this, but the point is that you were not forthcoming with the specific reasons why Shelley was forced to resign. You cannot advance an argument unless you address all the issues. To step around this does us no good. If I can point this out, others can as well, and they are not your allies.

Do I think Shelley did good, yes I do--did I intentionally avoid saying he was corrupt, yes I did. Quite frankly he could have been done in for a variety of pay backs, I don't think you rise to power with the personal connections he had in SF not to have incurred that wrath. But, I would not associate that specifically with his oversight of and possible opposition to DREs without checks and balances.

Mike