Mike Lacey, waving, is flanked by attorneys Ivo Labar and H. Sinclair Kerr, left, and Don Moon (who actually IS wearing a puffy coat) right, after hearing testimony about how Lacey told SF Weekly staffers that he wanted to put the Guardian out of business. Photo By Luke Thomas, fogcityjournal.

Three witnesses have testified in the Guardian v. SF Weekly trial that they heard Mike Lacey, a top executive with the chain that owns the Weekly, say he wanted to put the Guardian out of business.

That’s a key part of the case: The Guardian has to prove that the Weekly sold ads below cost – which isn’t much in dispute, since the chain has essentially admitted it – for the purpose of injuring a competitor. The evidence that Lacey, executive editor and one of the two primary owners of Village Voice Media (formerly New Times) intended to damage the Guardian bolsters that point.

The witnesses, former Weekly sales rep Jennifer Lopez, former Weekly co-publisher Carrie Fisher, and former Weekly editor Andrew O’Hehir, all described a January 1995 meeting at which Lacey arrived to tell the staff that New Times had bought the Weekly.

Lacey, along with Jim Larkin, the chain’s other top exec, marched into the Weekly office on Brannan street “with a very intimidating entrance,” Fisher testified. With Lacey and Larkin were Hal Smith, who headed up the chain’s ad sales, and Patty Calhoun, the editor of Westword, a New Times paper.

Lacey launched into a profanity-laced diatribe, Fisher testified, “insulting the office space, insulting the neighborhood and making comments on the quality of the writing” in what was then a small locally owned paper.

At one point, she said, Lacey picked up a copy of the Bay Guardian, threw it on the floor and said “we don’t just want to compete, we want to put the Guardian out of business.” While she said she couldn’t swear to the exactly language Lacey used, “the gist of what he said was very clear.”

Jennifer Lopez, who was a sales rep, testified to the same point yesterday.
Andrew O'Hehir, who was editor of the SF Weekly at the time of New Times purchase in l995, confirmed that story, describing Lacey throwing the Guardian on the floor and saying that the New Times was coming to San Francisco to "bury the Bay Guardian."

O'Hehir said that Lacey told the Weekly staff that the New Times had "deep pockets and deep resources" and would compete aggressively on both editorial and business fronts with the Guardian, the dominant alternative in San Francisco.

"We intend to beat the Guardian," he quoted Lacey as saying. In answer to a question a question about the "future relations with the Guardian," Lacey said that "we are going to bury the Bay Guardian. We would like to put the Bay Guardian out of business." O'Hehir is now living in New York City and working as columnist for Salon, the online magazine.

H. Sinclair Kerr, attorney for VVM/New Times, sought to minimize the impact of Lacey's quote by suggesting that Lacey was like a coach coming in to "fire up the team." No, replied E. Craig Moody, Guardian attorney -- in the case of the old Weekly the team was "quickly disbanded."

In fact, O'Heir was soon fired and most of the rest of the staff either quit or were fired.

The last event of the day was the reading of the deposition of Jim Larkin, the CEO of VVM/New Times. Richard Hill, a Guardian attorney, read the questions from the deposition that he took earlier this year in Larkin's Phoenix, Arizona office. Ralph Alldredge, another Guardian attorney, sat in the witness box and played Larkin to Hill's questions.

Larkin admitted in his deposition that the New Times was in a rate battle with the Bay Guardian in San Francisco, but refused to acknowledge that the chain had an advantage because of its size and assets.

Larkin had trouble remember lots of things. He couldn't remember the Bay Guardian Report that the Weekly publisher prepared each week and sent to him. He was at the Lacey meeting but he couldn't remember what Lacey about the Guardian or even what Lacey said about anything at the meeting. He denied ever saying he was "going to run the Bay Guardian out of business."

Larkin also refused to say if he ever put a floor under the Weekly's below cost sales.

"I try to make money," he said. "I try to break even. I don't do things this way."

Well, if Larkin and his publishers at the SF Weekly and the East Bay Express were operating under Larkin's mandate to make money, something was going very wrong, because the chain lost $25 million dollars over 11 years, without having one profitable year.

The Guardian claims this is no coincidence – the chain was willing to lose money through below-cost sales in an effort to harm a local competitor, which is illegal under California business law.

The jury trial continues Monday morning at 8:30 before Superior Court Judge Marla Miller.

PS: Andy Van De Voorde is not only nasty, he has no sense of humor. Jesus, Andy, I’m nowhere near cool enough to wear a puffy coat. I do, however, put either my Langlitz Leathers bomber jacket (made by a locally owned independent business) or a waterproof ski jacket over my clothes when it’s pouring rain.

Lighten up, Andy.

Here we are, awash in the shivers and shudders of another (incredibly fatiguing) election cycle. And although reports are streaming in of another Hillary sob session, the big news on the gushing front is that new star-studded "Yes We Can" vid, produced by Black-Eyed Pea frontman will i. am (ew) and Bob Dylan's son Jesse, featuring several earnest Hollywood and Billboard players singing along to Obama's semi-concession speech in New Hampshire.

Dammit, it made me weep a little, despite the fact that the incredibly high-flown rhetoric is a bit suspect (Obama's really twisting the King gears here) and has absolutely nothing to do with how, exactly, "we can." Other than voting for Obama with the stars?

700,000+ YouTube views in 48 hours can't be wrong

Question: What would a John Kerry number have sounded like? Why, oh why, did Dan Fogelburp have to die?

Alas for my enthused bandwagonismy, I foolishly, delightedly lived through the age of Live Aidquarius, and was bonkers as a child over the intensely disingenuous, not to say slightly racist, "Do They Know It's Christmas".

Christopher Cook, one of my predecessors as city editor of the Bay Guardian, sent out one of the more intriguing appeals that I've read today (among the many election eve missives that have been sent my way). It's a call to vote for John Edwards, even though Edwards dropped out of the race. While I still happily voted for Obama, I think Chris makes good points about the need to keep pushing the Democratic Party candidates to adopt more progressive positions, something that will become even more important in the coming months if Obama and Clinton remain neck-and-neck and we head into a brokered convention.

Bill Clinton always excelled at telling stories. Facing a tough question from a somber-looking vet? Tell a story. Bleary-eyed after hitting several California cities in a single day campaigning on behalf of your wife? Tell a story. Trying to convince undecided voters your family isn't an inhuman band of relentless over-achievers that hasn't experienced what most Americans might consider a normal day in decades? Tell a story.

Joined by Gavin Newsom, that's what Bill Clinton did again for voters yesterday at the Ferry Building in San Francisco. Told a bunch of stories.

What didn’t make sense was why Bill Clinton spent so much time on Monday canvassing California when Hillary’s people have acted as if the state was a lock. By the way, who are the badasses working for her that so brilliantly managed to make C.W. Nevius the vehicle of a localized, anti-Obama whisper campaign? Those bastards are earning their keep.

Hillary's latest commercial

Today promises to be the most dramatic California Democratic presidential primary vote in...well, maybe ever. To say that the future of our country hangs in the balance probably isn't even hyperbole. And that's a good thing because otherwise we're looking at a fairly boring and inconsequential ballot, which the Guardian will covering live, as we have every election day since the birth of this whole Internet thing. That's right, we were "live blogging" before anyone invented that stupid term. But I digress.

So check back here this evening as the numbers start rolling in from all the Super Fat Tuesday primaries. We'll have coverage from all the election night parties in town and commentary on the larger issues at play and the unique role Californians are playing in shaping this race. Or if you want to attend the parties yourself, here's a partial list of what we've come up with so far:

*** Barack Obama's campaign seems to be throwing the swankiest party in town, renting out the Fairmont Hotel (950 Mason Street) Grand Ballroom (as well as The Avalon down in Hollywood) to host supporters. The candidate himself will be in Illinois, but this pair of parties seems to show that he's already acting like the president-elect.

*** Hilliary Clinton's campaign is going to be more muted locally with what sounds like a fairly low-key party at their local campaign headquarters at 1122 Howard Street. They seem to instead be blowing their wads on an event in a couple hours at the Ferry Building featuring ex-prez Bill Clinton and Mayor Gavin Newsom, sort of a Philanderer's Ball in support of Clinton II, The Sequel.

*** Republican Ron Paul, who has a chance to get San Francisco's Republican delegates thanks to a vocal and visible local campaign, is being feted at a campaign party at Thai Stick Restaurant, 925 O'Farrell Street @ Polk.

*** The most significant San Francisco campaign, which is seeking to pass the Prop. A parks bond, will be gathering at the Boudin Bakery on Jefferson Street in Fisherman's Wharf.

* And finally, you can watch the results with staff from the Guardian at Kilowatt bar, 3160 16th Street in the Mission District.

Belly on up and take a big drink of democracy, baby.

If, as seems fairly likely at this point, John McCain comes out of Super Fat Tuesday with a lock on the Republican nomination, the most important question for Democrats is who can beat him. Most polls have Barack Obama narrowly beating McCain and Hillary Clinton narrowly losing to him, although it's pretty early in the process and the margins are too narrow to put too much stock in them at this point. But there's good reason to believe that Obama would have a far easier time beating McCain than Clinton would.
And that's something primary voters should think seriously about before casting their ballots today.

It was a casual dinner affair for the supporters of Ron Paul on election night, with roughly thirty people showing up for dinner under the big screen at Thai Stick, 925 O’Farrell St. As the results came in from around the country, party-goers casually looked up from their animated conversations to remark at the TV screen.
George Gaboury, self-described “media support”, struggled with a projector and screen, but was finally able to set up a slide show of the groups’ past exploits – including the staged Ron Paul “TeaParty” in December. The projected video showed attendees throwing boxes with words like “Patriot Act” and “WTO” written on them off of a pier near the Ferry Building.
“For people who have been abused by the government for so long, this is almost therapy,” Gaboury said, watching the screen.

The first numbers have come in and Barack Obama appears to have won a decisive victory in Georgia -- with early results giving him a 2-1 edge over Clinton -- a key test of whether he can carry the south. On the GOP side, McCain, Romney and Huckabee finished in a tight pack.

Camped out at campaign headquarters for the past week, Hillary supporters looked bleary-eyed but fervent early this afternoon as they speed-dialed calls to their vast Democratic database. Even if California results wouldn’t be available for several hours, some said, many of the mostly gray-haired women amongst the 70 or so volunteers, were optimistic Clinton would nail the nomination.

Tuesday, 9:09pm

In anticipation of guzzling free Stella, the Kilowatt has been jammed with voting drinkers since 6pm – well before the Guardian-sposored "Dodge the Drafts" party’s official start time. As for who these drinkers supported today, it’s impossible to guess -- even tho I’m surround by fellow Guardian employees, and within eyesight of a woman lustily fingering Obama's Audacity of Hope. The Obama supporters sharing my table say that the bartenders have informed them that we’re in "Clinton territory." Who knows?

One thing's for sure: it’s all about voting and drinking at the mission district bar. The free Stella ran out within an hour.

Tonight's real winner?

I did get some insight from Tim Paulson. The San Francisco Labor Council head tells me that although there’s no official endorsement from his organization, most laborers he know were in support of John Edwards (perhaps because Edwards marched with striking hotel workers three years ago), and that many of those votes are now going to Obama. Nevertheless machinists and teachers endorsed Clinton, while the SEIU favored Obama.

About 75 Democrats clenching glasses of beer and wine gawk at plasma TV’s at Jillian’s bar in SOMA tonight predicting which candidate will win California and eventually the presidency.

San Francisco based Democracy Action is hosting the party for Democrats who eagerly await the primary results. They debate whether Obama or Clinton is the better choice.

“It’s too early to say who’s going to win,” Alec Bash, President of Democracy Action, told the Guardian. “Back in ’04, we thought Kerry would win by a landslide.”

San Francisco City Hall -- normally a beehive of activity on election nights -- is nearly empty. One reporter (Rick Knee, stringing for AP), a couple of political junkies ... and that's about it. The Department of Elections doesn't even have its usual display screen for election results.

Frankly, nobody's paying attention to the local election. California's a big deal tonigh, and the state primary is huge news; municipal elections are lost in the whirlwind. (Of course, let's remember that the state's delegate total, which is what really counts, will probably be split pretty close to even, whoever "wins" the state; Paul Hogarth has a good analysis here.

But there IS a local election, and there are results, and we can pretty much call the three ballot measures now.

Prop. A, the parks bond, needs 66 percent of the vote, and has 64.9 percent in the (generally conservative) absentees. That should pass. Prop. B, the police retirement plan, is a slam dunk and will probably get 70 percent of the vote. The rather wacky Prop. C, the Alcaraz "peace center," is toast, with 73 percent voting no.

An interesting note the the local vote: Hillary Clinton's absentee-vote effort had paid off, big time. 65,000 people voted absentee, and Clinton is ahead in those votes, 53-38. I think we're going to see this statewide -- Obama will probably win on election day, but Clinton has a huge bank of absentees that he will have to overcome.

"Our time has come. Our movement is real and change is coming to America," Barack Obama told his crowd of supporters and it just seemed possible. He used his strong showing today to sound his themes: "Yes we can...This time can be different...We are the ones we've been waiting for."
It reverberated between Obama and the crowd, "Yes we can."

The California results aren't in, but it's clear that nationwide, nobody dominated Super Tuesday. Clnton and Obama have split the big states, and will split the delegates in California (even if one of them wins the popular vote). Same for the GOP -- there's no clear winner tonight.

So it looks to me right now as if there's a very good chance that both parties will go into their nominating conventions without a clear nominee. For the first time in my adult life, the conventions may actually mean something. We could have a pair of brokered conventions, perhaps even with no winner on the first ballot.

Could be wild.

CNN is projecting that Clinton will win California. If that's the case, it will be thanks to her agressive absentee program; she banked a lot of votes over the past month, long before Obama began to pick up momentum.

That's a big political bounce for Clinton, even if it won't amount to a huge difference in delegates.

Where's the numbers from CA and SF? Hold on, folks, we're watching and waiting and we have people around town waiting to report and comment.

Piggybacking on the turnout from the presidential election was one of the reasons that Prop. A, the $185 million parks bond, was targeted for this first ever February ballot, San Francisco Recreation and Parks Department director Yomi Agunbiade told me at the Yes on Prop. A party at Boudin's Bakery in Fisherman's Wharf. "We're definitely riding that wave, " he said minutes after the proposition posted its first real numbers at 67.6 % in favor, surpassing that always difficult 66.6 % it needs to win. Attending the shindig are Sup. Sean Elsbernd, financier Warren Hellman, Neighborhood Parks Council director Isabel Wade, and campaign consultant Patrick Hannan. They say it's been very hard to get people's attention for the measure, but they're pleased that it appears headed to victory.

"This is fantastic. This is going to benefit San Francisco all over the city, improving and repairing old infrastructure and creating new open space," Elsbernd said.

Hannan credit Eslbernd and Hellman with "carrying the ball" on the campaign, along with parents, athletic leagues and the Fisherman Wharf Merchants Association, which is going to benefit from the measure through improvements at Pier 43. (Sarah Phelan)

Prop. 92, the community college set aside, is going down hard and the Indian gaming contacts are uniformly ahead with about a million votes each, or 58 percent of turnout thus far.

Finally settled in at the Fairmont downtown after searching fruitlessly in the beginning for a wireless connection.

The most significant thing I've seen so far tonight is Oakland City Attorney John Russo throwing his weight behind Obama and MCing tonight's event. Last night we saw San Francisco City Attorney Dennis Herrera at a rally for Hillary attended by Bill Clinton, Gavin Newsom, Carole Migden and Oakland Vice Mayor Henry Chang.

So now at least we know who wants to return has-been bureaucrats to Washington and who might actually be interested in some original ideas at the federal level. We haven't seen much talk from analysts about what an Obama cabinet might look like, but for some of us, that's one of the most intriguing questions of all.

I often find Fat Tuesday a dizzying night. And some of the usual factors are in play: beads around my neck and a cocktail within reach. But that's not why I'm reeling. Holy shit, this Super part of Fat Tuesday is overwhelming, with so many numbers coming in from so many states, with all of it being sliced and diced by so many talking heads and number crunchers. And as I watch the swirl of data, the main impression I get is that nothing much changed today, except for the fact that we're inching our truly weird democratic process toward an uncertain conclusion. I think I need to freshen my drink. Laissez les bonnes temps roulez!

By around 9:30 pm it seemed clear at Hillary's campaign HQ that she had won the popular vote in California. A full room and diverse crowd gathered around the blaring TV, cheered and chanted her name. Rev. Amos Brown spoke to deafening cheers as he questioned the substance behind Obama's rhetoric but praised the "two fine democratic competitors." Assessor-Recorder Phil Ting spoke briefly.

California may be Clinton country, but Barack Obama has won San Francisco, home of Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi and more than a half-dozen delegates. True, it's a symbolic win, but symbols are what we're looking at tonight. Mayor Gavin Newsom was a high profile Hillary backer, but the progressives on the Board of Supervisors and other bodies backed Barack. Numbers now in SF are Obama 52 % and Clinton 44% with 78 % counted.

Ruth Dewson, the owner of Mrs. Dewson's Hats at Fillmore St. and California St., where former Mayor Willie Brown gets many of his signature head coverings, used the term "mind-boggling" to describe the lack of support black leaders in the this state have given her presidential candidate, Barack Obama. She specifically called out preachers.

"When a politician comes to your church, you don't owe them anything," Mrs. Dewson said. She added that so many local black ministers support Hillary Clinton simply because they backed Bill Clinton in the '90s. She spoke with us from the Obama campaign party at the Fairmont Hotel Grand Ballroom.

A large, dispersed crowd pressed towards the projector-sized screen at the front of the Grand Ballroom in the Fairmont Hotel when they saw that CNN was interrupting coverage of John McCain's speech (yawn) to go to Barack Obama's headquarters in Chicago.

The Democratic presidential candidate was making his way towards the stage, and the audiences here and on TV were equally ecstatic. Chants of "O-BA-MA!" rang out. CNN took the cue and dropped McCain entirely. A series of roars accompanied Obama's speech, especially when he made the declaration that "Change is coming to America!"
That slogan was reiterated numerous times throughout the night. After Obama finished in Chicago, the attention in San Francisco turned to the front podium. Numerous elected officials took the stage to express their support of Obama.

Congresswoman Barbara Lee promised and re-promised, "California will never be the same because of what we've done in this movement. It will never be the same. Never."

The crowd here grumbled loudly when CNN announced that Hillary had a substantial lead in California. But the state is far from lost to Clinton. A massive portion of California's voters submitted absentee ballots that have not been counted. And as we pointed out earlier, even if the rest of the state's Democratic establishment goes for Hillary, San Francisco would rather share a tumbler of bourbon with Obama. Here are some images from his Super Tuesday party at the Fairmont Hotel in downtown SF:

It was a wild day in court in the Guardian’s lawsuit against the SF Weekly. Bruce Brugmann took the stand. He generally made the SF Weekly’s lawyer look silly – but the Weekly’s out-of-town hit man, Andy Van De Voorde, was almost giddy with his attempts to say that Bruce Brugmann did poorly as a witness.

I’m biased, of course (so is the hit man), but I have to disagree: Bruce laid out the Guardian’s history, explained how the Weekly had attacked us, and stood up remarkably well under a cross-examination that may have given Van De Voorde something to write about, but didn’t really present many re