Sunday Commentary: The Legacy of Gandhi in Davis Toppled

Mayor Robb Davis faces protestors as he speaks on Gandhi in 2016

By David M. Greenwald

From the start, the Gandhi statue got off on the wrong foot in Davis.  An international symbol of peace at the park in Davis, what could go wrong?  But one person’s freedom fighter is another person’s symbol of oppression, so while people in the Indian community applauded the move, people in the Sikh community saw it as an affront to their struggle.

Unlike a lot of issues, this was a difficult one for me because I truly respected people on both sides of the divide.  Moreover, I consider myself a student of civil disobedience and the civil rights movement, it is impossible to appreciate people like Martin Luther King and John Lewis without understanding that people like Gandhi and Tolstoy underlie their movement.

The disagreements turned ugly this week when the statue was literally cut off its moorings and decapitated.

On Saturday, Mayor Gloria Partida along with her four colleagues and City Manager Mike Webb put out a strong statement of condemnation.

“The City of Davis condemns the vandalism that destroyed the statue of Mahatma Mohandas Gandhi in Central Park. We do not support any actions that include the destruction of property,” they said.

“We understand that our community reflects a diversity of views and values, but we expect that everyone will extend respect to each other and to shared spaces. We are committed to creating a City that is inclusive and lives up to our principles. We work diligently to ensure the physical and psychological safety of every resident. Acts of destruction are violent and shatter this safety.”

The statement by the council gave light to both of these positions.

They said: “We sympathize with those who are grieving the destruction of the statue and promise a thorough investigation and full accountability for those who committed this crime. We sympathize with those who have sincerely voiced their opposition to the statue and who feel unheard. But we reiterate our belief that the solution to solving such differences is never in violent acts but through compromise and dialogue. It is our sincere desire that our community move forward with peaceful and positive discourse and reconciliation.”

The Indian Government is naturally furious about this.

“The Government of India strongly condemns this malicious and despicable act against a universally respected icon of peace and justice,” they wrote in a press release on Saturday.

They are demanding that the US State Department order a “thorough investigation into the incident and appropriate action against those responsible for this despicable act.”

But the situation is complicated.

Former Mayor Robb Davis, who was involved in bringing the statue to Davis in the first place, told the Vanguard he felt personally deceived.

The original staff report, he noted, never mentioned anything “about the Indian government and that the approval of the statue was with the understanding that it was a gift from Indian American community members.”

He said, “This is a gift to the City of Davis by the Indo-American community in Davis. Once the prima-facie approval of the project has been established, then the project leaders will seek financial sponsors to fund various expenses involved. We anticipate no difficulty, whatsoever, in finding sponsors. There will be no financial obligation to the City.”

He said it was only months later “that I discovered the role of the Indian government. Had I known it was a gift directly from the Indian government I would not have voted for it. Indian government led by Modi is a Hindu nationalist government that has created a dangerous situation for non-Hindus in India.”

He told the Vanguard, “I can say, categorically, that had I known in February that the Indian government was donating the statue, I would not have voted to approve its placement in the City.  The Modi government that has promoted the placing of Gandhi statues in various cities around the world as a means to burnish its image abroad is a Hindu Nationalist government that has taken actions detrimental to non-Hindu groups in India. “

At the same time, “Whatever the case, we received the statue and welcomed the symbol of peacemaking in our community.  I condemn the cowardly act of destruction of the statue.  It is disgraceful behavior and despite my misgivings about the process that brought the statue to Davis, I believe that nothing can excuse this abhorrent act.”

I definitely agree that whatever debate there was over the statue, there was a due process that needed to take place.

I listened to the concerns of the Sikh community back in 2016, as well as last summer when many came at that time to protest the statue.

One of the complaints was that Gandhi was a racist against Blacks.  If he was, it is hard to imagine how Black leaders for civil rights would be following him.

Among the books that Malcolm X read while in prison was the Collected Works of Mahatma Gandhi.

In 1959, Martin Luther King, inspired by Gandhi’s principles of non-violence, took a trip to India and dined with Prime Minister Nehru.

MLK said, “Gandhi was able to mobilize and galvanize more people in his lifetime than any other person in the history of this world. And just with a little love and understanding goodwill and a refusal to cooperate with an evil law, he was able to break the backbone of the British Empire. This, I think, was one of the most significant things that ever happened in the history of the world. More than 390 million people achieved their freedom, and they achieved it nonviolently.

“We argued this point at some length with the groups of African students who were studying in India,” MLK said. “They felt that nonviolent resistance could only work in a situation where the resisters had a potential ally in the conscience of the opponent.

“We soon discovered that they, like many others, tended to confuse passive resistance with nonresistance.

“This is completely wrong,” he argued. “True nonviolent resistance is not unrealistic submission to evil power. It is rather a courageous confrontation of evil by the power of love, in the faith that it is better to be the recipient of violence than the inflicter of it, since the latter only multiplies the existence of violence and bitterness in the universe, while the former may develop a sense of shame in the opponent, and thereby bring about a transformation and change of heart.”

MLK was not blind to the problems facing India at the time of his visit (you can see his lengthy thoughts here).

It is pretty clear from MLK to the Reverend James Lawson to John Lewis, the civil rights movement embraced the teachings of Gandhi.  It is also very clear that not everyone saw Gandhi as the embodiment of non-violent resistance and some saw him rather as an oppressor himself.

But the modern legacy—again—is complicated.

In a 2019 story, NPR noted, “Gandhi Is Deeply Revered, But His Attitudes On Race And Sex Are Under Scrutiny.”  In 2015, a BBC article reviewed a new book, and wrote, “Mahatma Gandhi has been variously described as an anti-colonial protester, a religious thinker, a pragmatist, a radical who used non-violence effectively to fight for causes, a canny politician and a whimsical Hindu patriarch. But was India’s greatest leader also a racist? The authors of a controversial new book on Gandhi’s life and work in South Africa certainly believe so.”

But again … complicated.

“There’s no way around it: Gandhi was a racist early in his life, says his biographer Ramachandra Guha,” according to the NPR story.  “Gandhi as a young man went with the ideas of his culture and his time. He thought in his 20s that Europeans are the most civilized. Indians were almost as civilized, and Africans were uncivilized,” Guha, 61, told NPR in an interview in May at his home in Bengaluru, India.  “However, he outgrew his racism quite decisively, and for most of his life as a public figure, he was an anti-racist, talking for an end to discrimination of all kinds,” he said.

Gandhi’s biographer and grandson, Rajmohan Gandhi, told the BBC that the younger Gandhi—he arrived in South Africa as a 24-year-old briefless lawyer—was undoubtedly “at times ignorant and prejudiced about South Africa’s blacks”. He said that he believes Gandhi’s “struggle for Indian rights in South Africa paved the way for the struggle of black rights.” He argues that “Gandhi too was an imperfect human being,” but the “imperfect Gandhi was more radical and progressive than most contemporary compatriots.”

As an ABC article puts it: “Was Gandhi racist towards blacks? The short answer is: before 1906, emphatically yes; from 1906 to 1913, qualifiedly yes; after 1913 or so, increasingly no.”

This will probably not satisfy either side of the divide and that is fine.  I can understand those who are victims of India’s policies, and their trepidation.  From the standpoint of the US and civil rights, it is hard to imagine the force of the civil rights movement without the power of civil disobedience.

It is that tension that ultimately resulted in the destruction of the Gandhi statue in Davis, and which complicates the legacy of this man who inspired a generation of freedom fighters.

—David M. Greenwald reporting

Support our work – to become a sustaining at $5 – $10- $25 per month hit the link:

About The Author

David Greenwald is the founder, editor, and executive director of the Davis Vanguard. He founded the Vanguard in 2006. David Greenwald moved to Davis in 1996 to attend Graduate School at UC Davis in Political Science. He lives in South Davis with his wife Cecilia Escamilla Greenwald and three children.

Related posts


  1. Keith Olsen

    Get used to it, after a summer of rioting with our leaders basically looking the other way as statues were toppled, buildings burned and businesses looted people are more and more going to take things into their own hands.

    But one person’s freedom fighter is another person’s symbol of oppression

    Yup, there’s always someone who feels offended by almost anything.  Since no one can feel offended these days the only answer is symbols must go.

  2. Ron Glick

    Gandhi murdered again.

    “Unlike a lot of issues, this was a difficult one for me because I truly respected people on both sides of the divide.”

    Good people on both sides? Please. Many were rude and had interest in civil discourse only as far as it benefitted their own position. They disrupted the ceremony at the ribbon cutting even after Robb Davis gave them hours of time at the City Council in an attempt at reconciliation. Now this.

    One long time politician who was there told me they had never been so disrespected in their entire career.


  3. Ron Glick

    One time many years ago two girls were in my classroom at lunch finishing up an experiment. We started talking. One girl was Pakistani and spoke Urdo at home. The other was Indian and spoke Hindi at home. I asked them about how it was they were such good friends despite the cultural differences of their backgrounds?

    They explained that they are here, were raised here and that together, with similar regional backgrounds, they felt they had more in common and felt comfortable with each other.

    Hopefully the Sikhs and the Hindus in America will get there but probably not until the American born generations start to assimilate.



  4. Don Shor

    I think we now know, from our own history in the U.S., that it is unwise to install statues of public figures on public property. The statue should be restored and then provided to the Indian community in Davis to install on any privately-owned site they prefer.

    1. Bill Marshall

      Are you saying the figures of Lincoln in the Lincoln Memorial, and Jefferson in the Jefferson Memorial be removed?

      Perhaps the Washington, Lincoln, and Jefferson Memorials should be removed in their entirety?

      The statue of MLK, Jr removed from the Mall?

      All are

      statues of public figures on public property.

      Many folk believe ‘thou shalt not create graven images‘…


        1. Bill Marshall

          When are you available to pose?  You might need to change your legal middle name to Chestnut, to provide rational ‘linkage’… and, you might have to ‘pass’… but the good news is, ‘not necessarily’… Dave Pelz Bike-Ped OC, and Howard Reese Bike-Ped path were named when the honoree still lived…

          As long as it is not worshipped… that would violate the Pentateuch… and what many Christians and Muslims believe, based on that…

        1. Alan Miller

          But so far, the inclusion of Zuckerberg’s name for San Francisco General Hospital is “o.k.”

          Zuck’s name will stay “o.k.” as long as the money flows.  “Satan Is Just All Right With Me” (Pardon, Doobies) as long as he pays the bills.

        2. Bill Marshall

          There is a “rule of thumb”, in the public sector, not always observed:  “Don’t name something for a living person… they may go horribly sideways”…

          I accidentally permitted a street name to be used… a controversial figure, and turned out he wasn’t dead… CC approved it… less than a year later, due to outcry, by a few, CC reversed and renamed, within the theme ‘scientists and inventors’… when the developer heard of the contoversy, he asked, “What, does Davis have a problem with Jews?”

          Drew Avenue, was originally named Teller.

          And, there are prominent myths about Drew… spread by “L-Anon”… to inflame anti-racist sentiments… nothing new under the sun, as it is written…

        3. Ron Oertel

          Drew Avenue, was originally named Teller.

          Not sure what problem they have with honoring top-rate magic.  Though you’d also need an intersection with “Penn’s” street.

          Well, maybe in Vegas at least.

          Bada-bing.  (Yeah – I know, Funny Ron ain’t so funny today.)

          I was trying to work in something regarding Siegfried and Roy, but couldn’t see a way to make that work. But hey, they do (unfortunately) meet one of the “qualifications” you mentioned.

        4. Ron Glick

          Stamps and streets are named for the deceased. Buildings for the patrons.

          Teller was also known as the father of the Hydrogen Bomb. He was at the Livermore Lab but had an office in Davis because he wasn’t welcomed at Berkeley. Kubrick modeled Dr. Strangelove after Teller. Naming a street in Davis for Teller would have been a humiliation for this City and we would have been the butt of jokes for years.

          Bringing up Teller in an article about Gandhi is as juxtaposed as the name of Tolstoy’s most famous opus “War and Peace.”

          As for local scientists that should have streets named to honor their contribution Davis needs a street named for Katherine Esau. Sadly, even though she was one of the first ten women members of the National Academy of Sciences, she eventually left U.C. Davis for U.C. Santa Barbara because of anti-female biases in the UCD administration.


        5. Ron Oertel

          a humiliation for this City and we would have been the butt of jokes for years.

          Pretty sure that ship sailed a long time ago.  🙂

          Partly from taking-itself too seriously / self-importantly.

          Though interesting notes you pointed out regarding the other “Teller”.

        6. Bill Marshall

          Ron G… suggest you read,

          Edward Teller – Wikipedia

          He was a theorist… attended one of his ‘brown-bag seminars’… he never sought claim to how his research was used… Oppenheimer on the other hand, was an active participant in making the H-bomb a weapon… he later back-pedalled… blamed Teller and others for Nagasaki and Hiroshima… although he promoted nuclear weapons… Oppenheimer was @ Berkeley, and the one who effectively banned Teller, lest the truth come out…

          J. Robert Oppenheimer – Wikipedia

          There’s a 90% likelihood that the H-bombings allow me to write this… Dad would likely have perished if an invasion of Japan was the only way to end the war… Dad was a medic, couldn’t hit the broad side of a barn with a 45 or rifle… (well, maybe he could hit that, but not a person, based on accuracy and morality)

          Yes, I do think it is on-topic, and the comparisons are valid.  People do some great things, and participate, at one degree or the other, in some bad things… people often lionize Oppenheimer as a pacifist… guess he was able to wash his “bloodly hands” somewhere… as did Gandhi… but “blood” don’t wash off too easily…

          You are trending ‘sanctimonious’…




        7. Ron Glick

          My dad was there too. Having won Bronze Stars in the battles of Leyte and Okinawa. While on Okinawa, where he was awaiting the invasion of Japan, he was happy when the war ended.

          Of course the Nagasaki and Hiroshima suffered from the A-Bomb not the H-Bomb that Teller advocated.

        8. Bill Marshall

          Ron G… my Dad was on Okinawa as well… a Navy Corpsman assigned to the Marines… after Japan surrendered, the Marines (and he) was sent to China because the Japanese military was still active there… ironically, he saw no hostile action… Mao’s and Chiang Kai-shek’s forces had liberated the areas shortly before… Mao and Chiang worked in concert, as they had a ‘common enemy’… shortly later, they were enemies…

          Before that “the enemy of my enemy, is my friend” thingy was going on…

        9. Ron Glick

          My father was in the Army but he carried a radio and communicated with the gun batteries on Naval vessels directing fire. When they made the movie about the Navajo code talkers my father told me he would hear them talking amidst the chatter.

          When I was growing up we would watch war movies but as the color and special effects improved it became more difficult for him. In the 80’s I took him to see Platoon. Afterward he told me that the battle scenes were too real.

          The next day my mother told me he shook in his sleep. We never went to see another war movie.

          1. Don Shor

            My father was a radar operator and sailed into Japan the day after the surrender. Interesting to note that he would not allow us to watch TV sitcoms about the war (Hogans Heroes etc.). I remember him walking across the room and switching off the TV once, saying “war isn’t funny.” He didn’t like movies that glorified war and he hardly talked about his war experiences at all.
            We had interesting debates about the decision to drop the bombs on Japan and, in fact, about peaceful resistance, since I grew up in the shadow of the Vietnam war (my brother and cousin were subject to the draft lottery). He felt quite certain that peaceful protests would never have stopped the Japanese or German military conquests, but strongly opposed our involvement in Vietnam. Non-violent resistance, to paraphrase his opinion, was a luxury of a democratic secular state or a weak colonial power, and not likely to prevail under autocracy or theocracy.

        10. Alan Miller

          My father doing radar research at M.I.T to support the war effort.  He took a lot of sh*t for not being off at war, but the program was top secret so they had to claim civilian jobs.

    2. Dave Hart

      Absolutely right, Don, and this is a perfect example of the pitfalls of erecting statues to individuals. What if the U.S. were to have a white supremacist president who pushed through a bill with the help of a Republican Congress to spend millions of dollars erecting statues of Robert E. Lee in foreign cities as a way of promoting U.S. culture abroad?  And if one of those statues was subsequently torn down, how would any decent person feel bad that Robert E. Lee’s memory was disrespected?  I’m not in favor of vigilantism as a tactic, and I support non-violent mass action as a tactic.  That is why I can simultaneously honor the tactical brilliance of Gandhi, be outraged at his racist beliefs, not want a statue erected in his memory and not enjoy the way his statue was removed but feel that the city should just drop the whole dang thing.  The Indian Government made a gift, we decided we didn’t want it any more, so it’s none of the Indian Government’s business what happened to the statue.  That’s what happens when you give something to someone.  It is theirs to do with or dispose of as they see fit.  End of story and the City Council would do well to just close the book on this big fat mistake.

  5. Alan Miller

    “The 6-foot-tall [statue of Ghandi] appeared to have been sawed off at the ankles . . . ” — Davis Enterprise

    “From the start, the Gandhi statue got off on the wrong foot in Davis . . . ” — Davis Vanguard

    Coincidence?  I think not.


  6. Alan Miller

    The disagreements turned ugly this week when the statue was literally cut off its moorings and decapitated.

    Too bad no one saw that coming . . . oh,  yeah, we all saw that coming.

  7. Alan Miller

    They [Government of India] are demanding that the US State Department order a “thorough investigation into the incident and appropriate action against those responsible for this despicable act.”

    Hey y’all, it was broken bronze, not an assassination.  Investigation by Davis Police? Yes.  By U.S. State Department? Not so much.

  8. Alan Miller

    “Was Gandhi racist towards blacks? The short answer is: before 1906, emphatically yes; from 1906 to 1913, qualifiedly yes; after 1913 or so, increasingly no.”

    This does not matter, as Cancel Culture does not recognize or celebrate growth of the human soul through a lifetime.  Cancel culture investigates and finds any fault from a person’s past and condemns them for life, often ruining their lives with lost jobs and smeared reputations.  Sorry Ghandi, you’ve been cancelled, and toppled.


  9. Eric Gelber

    Let’s not make simplistic comparisons with protests over statues of Confederate generals, whose sole legacies are based on their armed insurrection against the U.S. to preserve the institution of slavery.

    History recognizes and reveres Gandhi for his legacy of peaceful resistance. Like the slave-owning founders, Gandhi was an imperfect product of his time. We should not overlook their flaws and inconsistencies; but, we likewise shouldn’t forget their profound contributions to our existence as a nation committed to social justice.

    1. David Greenwald

      I generally agree with this comment. I definitely view the Confederate Generals and flag itself in a very different light. The closer comparison point would be Thomas Jefferson. Did he have slaves yes. He was a product of his time and his station. He clearly wrestled with the morality of slavery for his entire life. Do we judge him for his flaws or the fact that he laid the ground work for a more perfect union?

    2. Don Shor

      I’m guessing most people were unaware until this statue controversy that Gandhi was not universally revered, as we have a different perception of him in this country. Robb Davis has identified some key issues with how this statue came to be given to the city. It should have been reconsidered at the time, and its restoration on that site should be reconsidered now.

      1. Eric Gelber

        Tell me one “universally revered” figure who was flawless. Mother Teresa was no saint when it came to the quality of healthcare she provided or evangelicalism she promoted.

        1. Ron Glick

          This has never actually been about Gandhi. It has always been about the conflict between the Sikh minority in India, how they have been treated by the Hindu majority and the animosity the U.S. Sikh community still harbors against India.

        2. Dave Hart

          This statue is not as much about Gandhi as it is about the current Indian Government who has decided to use the pop culture understanding of Gandhi as a marketing campaign to burnish their new xenophobic politics.  They gave us a gift.  We don’t want it anymore.  Nothing to investigate other than misdemeanor vandalism.

    1. Ron Glick

      Saving Central Park was before my time here. I’m only a beginner having arrived in the late 80’s. Who were the people involved in preserving the lower half of the park? Your link doesn’t say.

      1. Bill Marshall

        Ron G…

        Not ‘saving‘ Central Park, but expanding it by a full city block, and the roadway in-between… nothing was “preserved”… a potential commercial site, or City Hall site was “annexed” to the existing park… anyone who asserts otherwise, lies…

        I saw it all…

          1. Don Shor

            Measure S “saved open space” for the purpose of expanding the park instead of building a shopping center. At the time of the vote it was functioning as a parking lot. The portion in question was directly west of central park and is now the site of the Central Park Garden among other things.

            Issues are seldom simple in the downtown area, because competing interests pull at city officials from opposite directions, arguing passionately that opportunities will be lost forever if mistakes are made. A case in point is the 1986 debate over the fate of the Arden-Mayfair Lot, a city-owned block located just south of Central Park. At the time, the park covered only the block located just south of Fifth Street, and Fourth Street ran between B and C streets. South of Fourth was the long vacant lot. In simple terms, the debate offered city voters a clearcut choice: more retail shops or more open space.

            Development proposals surfaced from time to time, but the lot remained undeveloped for two decades. Most of the time, it was used as an unpaved parking lot. Once it was used for a giant Monopoly game sponsored by Derrick Bang, owner of a local game store. Bigger, grander plans were in the works. The lot had long intrigued many city officials and downtown business leaders, because it offered an easy, practical way to significantly increase the area’s retail base.

            The 1986 debate was triggered by the city’s December 1985 decision to lease the lot to Terranomics, a San Francisco firm that proposed building a shopping center with room for two dozen retail stores. In all, it would feature about 75,000 square feet of retail space and an underground parking garage with more than 300 parking spaces. Included in the plans were a central plaza, indoor-outdoor restaurants, movie theaters and space for non-profit facilities such as the Davis Science Center. The Davis City Council favored the project. So did the Davis Area Chamber of Commerce. Naturally, the Science Center’s Building Committee was enthused.

            Soon, though, opponents banded together in a group known as Save Open Space to campaign against the shopping center, hoping to convince the city to extend the park across the vacant lot. Leading the charge was Maynard Skinner, a former mayor who lived in the neighborhood located west of the park. Save Open Space sponsored an initiative drive that allowed city voters to settle the issue on June 3, 1986. By voting for Measure S, voters would mandate the lot be developed as an extension of the park. Up to one-third of the site could be used for parking, public facilities, and facilities for use by non-profit groups such as the Science Center. That proviso bettered the measure’s chances of success, because otherwise the Science Center would have been left out in the cold. Also, allowing some parking would help ease the apprehensions of the Davis Farmers Market, which set up shop along the eastern edge of the existing park and was used to having many of its customers park on the unpaved lot. Measure S also said extending the park would protect nearby neighborhoods from adverse environmental impacts, avoid traffic congestion and bolster the vitality of the downtown area.

            “Vote yes on S to prevent an oversized, massive shopping center as Central Park’s neighbor. Vote yes on S to prevent outside developers from exploiting this city-owned block,” said the ballot argument for the measure. It denied claims the shopping center would strengthen the downtown area, saying, “It will devastate existing businesses and destroy the small-town character of the area.” The argument was signed by five people, including Councilman Tom Tomasi, former Mayor Kent Gill, UCD Chancellor Emeritus Emil Mrak and Skinner.

            “The question now before you is whether this property should be developed with a blend of retail commercial and non-profit public facilities which will include open space, or stand vacant for a further undetermined period of time,” said the ballot argument against the measure. It was signed by the City Council, because the majority of its member opposed the measure.

            Most voters sided with the open-space advocates: the final tally showed 7,375 votes, 57.9 percent of the total, for Measure S, and 5,370, or 42.1 percent, opposing it. In February 1988, council members approved a final master plan for the new, improved park. One of the first steps was to close Fourth Street between B and C streets, then rip out the pavement so the Arden-Mayfair lot could be integrated with the existing park. The city also widened C Street between Third and Fifth to make room for diagonal parking on both sides.

            At the southwest corner of the expanded park, the city built the Davis teen center, known simply as Third and B after the two streets that intersect near its front door. Still on the drawing boards was an outdoor cafe to be built at the southeast end of the park. North of that site the covered plaza used for the Farmers Market was added. A garden area graced the western edge of the park, next to B Street. Nearby, the expanded park featured a fountain that sent forth streams of water much like a geyser, much to the delight of small kids looking to cool off on hot summer days. Adding to the ambiance were several pieces of public art: a stone wall by David Middlebrook; “Source and Resource,” a water basin created by Kathleen Casper-Noonan and Jeff Reed; and “Bronze and Basalt,” a piece by Sandra Shannonhouse located in the garden area.

            During 1995, the Davis Education Foundation added the park’s crowning touch: a whimsical, pedal-powered carousel in the northern half of the park. Hundreds of Davis kids turned out to help decorate the carousel’s 10 seats with its creator, William Dentzel of Port Townsend, Wash., a fifth-generation carousel-builder. To pay for the project, the foundation solicited funds from local businesses, organizations and individuals.


  10. Ron Glick

    “Bill: They only remove Lincoln’s and Jefferson’s name from schools. Feinstein’s for that matter, as well:”

    Yes, Jefferson Davis and George Lincoln Rockwell.

  11. Bill Marshall

    Not sure what problem they have with honoring top-rate magic.

    Perhaps top-rate science, perhaps?  Your choice of the word “magic”, is interesting… but definitely “drifting” from topic, even more than I may have contributed to…

    Perhaps we should erect a statue to the Ex-Prez, who predicted/assured that ‘magic’ (in defiance of science) would end the Covid-19 by late April.

    And yes, Moderator(s) I know I crossed at least two lines, and expect at least a ruler on the knuckles, [editing or deletion of post], perhaps even banishment… and, by feeding off-topic, I’d deserve either…

    “Clean-up on Aisle 3″…

    1. Ron Oertel

      “This” moderator says that a little “drift” (including yours) is what makes the comment section more interesting and amusing. And so far, the conversation has been relatively respectful (which is unusual in-and-of itself).

      Unless we want to strictly adhere to the “oh-so-serious” topic, regarding a particular statue.

    2. Moderator

      Not sure what problem they have with honoring top-rate magic.

      Perhaps top-rate science, perhaps? Your choice of the word “magic”, is interesting… but definitely “drifting” from topic, even more than I may have contributed to…

      His comment was a joking reference to Penn and Teller who are magicians.

  12. Bill Marshall

     At the time of the vote it was functioning as a parking lot. The portion in question was directly west of central park and is now the site of the Central Park Garden among other things.

    El wrongo!  Try directly south… as accurate would be, SSW (south by south west).

    Don’t get me started re: Mike Fitch and accuracy…

    1. Bill Marshall

      Don’t get me started re: Mike Fitch and accuracy…

      Referent for folk that ‘weren’t around’ … Mike Fitch was a reporter for the Davis Enterprise, covering City Gov’t, and author of the draft manuscript that Don Shor cited.

Leave a Reply

X Close

Newsletter Sign-Up

X Close

Monthly Subscriber Sign-Up

Enter the maximum amount you want to pay each month
Sign up for