Portland, Oregon Rejects Fluoride

Good news on the individual choice front for a change. A local election held in Portland this week seems to show a vote on fluoridation of the city's water going down to a pretty solid defeat. Apparently voters there rejected it twice earlier on before approving it in 1978. Then that approval was overturned somehow so the powers that be started trying to fluoridate the water again.

It's remarkable that places like San Jose and Sonoma County seem to be insisting on water fluoridation often against the wishes of residents. I can't help but wonder if there's some payola involved?

Drug Testing Would Have Prevented Boston Bombing

Who'da thunk if we just had more mandatory drug testing the Boston Marathon bombing might not have happened. So says Robert Dupont who, coincidentally, is a major partner in a company involved in drug testing.

EPIC Lawsuit over 199/197 Plan

The Del Norte Triplicate reports on a lawsuit filed by EPIC and other environmental groups over CalTrans' realignment plan for Routes 197 and 199. No surprised there but I did notice what seemed to be an inaccurate statement in the story:

 "Although  no old-growth redwoods would be cut down, like in the controversial Richardson Grove project,....". 

That could read either of two ways: Just as with Richardson Grove, no old- growth trees will be cut down, or, unlike the Richardson Grove realignment, no old- growth will be cut down for the 197/199 project.

I read it as suggesting old- growth will be cut down. Hey, if they're getting their information from EPIC, they probably think old- growth is being cut down. I sent a letter to the Triplicate clarifying that no old- growth will be removed at Richardson Grove. Wonder if they'll publish it?

Addendum: Received a letter from the writer of the story on Tuesday afternoon. He thanked me for correcting the information, changed the wording and added a correction to the story. Am I great, or what?

Arkley Center Closing Indefinite?

The Arkley Center for the Performing Arts is closing for an indefinite period of time, reports the Times- Standard. This is supposedly for repairs and such. Hard to believe that after all the time and money already spent rebuilding it, and it hasn't been open for all that long. I suspect there's more to the story and wouldn't be surprised if it stays closed.

Yikes! Earthquake

Just felt a decent jolt. It frightened me as earthquakes always do. Hope that's all there is.

The Rand Paul Enigma

I'm not sure what to think of Rand Paul. He seems a principled defender of liberty one moment, then a waffler the next. Most will agree he's looking at a presidential run in the near future. Should libertarians support him?

I don't know. Especially after he threw principle to the wind and endorsed Mitt Romney for president last time around. If he's willing to do something like that, what might he do next in the name of pragmatism?

I'm also not sure about him saying one thing to one audience and slightly different thing to the next, although I understand that can be consistent with winning hearts and minds. You don't win over people by giving a message they don't want to hear. You try finding common ground and then move them toward your side.

Nick Gillespie has a nice piece at the The Daily Beast  about Rand that really hits the nail on the head. He points out that Rand's apparent inconsistency could come back to haunt him: "It’s far more likely that if Paul continues to send significantly different messages to different audiences, he will end up alienating all his possible supporters." And It would be ironic indeed "... if Rand Paul turns out to be one of the few people left in America not fully comfortable with his own message.".

It will be interesting to see if his message ends up being one many, including libertarians, will support. I don't think I'll have to worry about having to decide whether vote for him. I wrote elsewhere we could do worse than have Rand Paul for President, but he'll more than likely be given the same treatment by the Republicans as Ron Paul and Gary Johnson did. I can't imagine him winning the nomination.

Eureka Crime/Safety Poll Now Online

The Times- Standard had a story on crime and people's safety concerns the other day. The story mentioned a poll readers could take in regards crime in their neighborhood. The only problem was most, if not all of us, couldn't find the poll. I wasn't the only one asking in the comments where the poll was. Did we miss it? Maybe.

Regardless, it's up now. If that link doesn't work just go to the Times- Standard web site. Poll link should be at top left, just above the local news.

My first comment when asked to rate my neighborhood, was to define "safety". Is that safety from violence or crime altogether? I rated our neighborhood 8 overall, with 10 being safest. Had I the choice, I'd give it maybe a 5 for theft or vandalism as we get that on occasion.

I might give it an 8 or higher for safety from violence as I can't recall any violent crime, aside from a few fights at the druggie house across the street, in the over 20 years we've lived here.

Bogus Cell Phone Driving Statistics?

I can't help but be skeptical of the statistics being thrown out in this Santa Rosa Press- Democrat article. Referring to a recent crackdown on cellphone use while driving, the Petaluma Police Department is claiming their efforts have been a success. They're saying "...at the start of the effort, 40 percent of drivers spotted by police were violating the law. By the end of the month, only 4.2 percent were,...".

I don't buy it. As I wrote in a comment to that story, that doesn't jive with my own observations. Sure, I live in Eureka, but we supposedly had an enforcement effort in that regard here, too.

Interesting that they thought 40 percent of drivers were spotted driving while chatting before the enforcement began. That's even higher than my own non- scientific study taken years ago that showed about a third of drivers talking on cellphones while driving. Then they're saying it dropped down to 4.2%??? I don't think so.

I've noticed even more people driving around talking on cellphones lately than usual. I think they're fluffing their statistics somehow.