Wednesday, April 23, 2014

Pledging to uphold the Constitution


I fully support Sheriff D’Agostini for standing up to “Support and Defend the Constitution Against All Enemies, Foreign and Domestic” by stating in his letter to Vice President Joe Biden that states that Sheriff D’Agostini will fully support the Second Amendment against further unconstitutional encroachment by liberals in our government.

Make no mistake, the Second Amendment does indeed grant that U.S. citizens have the individual right to keep and bear arms — refer to U.S. Supreme Court rulings on this subject — which libs will vilify and deny, such as they do with most facts of our Constitution.

Nowhere in the Second Amendment is hunting, recreation or sporting use specified.

It is stated as “Militia,” and as such with military grade weapons.

LFs (liberal fools/LBs whatever) are quite adept at twisting our language and speech to distort the truth and try to fool people in order to strip our citizens of their God-given rights to self-defense as well as our Constitutional rights.

The reason why LBs continue to ignore facts or truth is that they do not care about either since LBs have an agenda and agendas do not care about anything but steamrolling towards their goals.

This is a message to the Police, to the military, to the TSA, to Homeland Security and to members of every other enforcement arm of the government. Do what you know is right in your heart and soul. Refuse to do the handy work just because you are ordered to.

All commissioned officers in the United States military must make the following oath of office when they are appointed in the U.S. Army, U.S. Air Force, U.S. Navy or U.S. Marine Corps:

“I, (state your name), having been appointed a (rank) in the United States (branch of service), do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the office upon which I am about to enter. So help me God.”

Enlisted personnel take the Oath of Enlistment, rather than the Oath of Office. Presently, our main enemies of the Constitution are domestic.

If you want to see how idiotic LBs are, watch for and read their responses to my letter as well as the responses against Sheriff D’Agostini.

I did not serve in the U.S. Navy for 41.5 years to let this happen to our country.

Stand up and Support Sheriff D’Agostini and our Constitution so that we can maintain our country and not lose it to LBs.

CAPT, USN retired
Cameron Park

Letters to the Editor


Discussion | 54 comments

  • EvelynFebruary 05, 2013 - 8:54 am

    From a Chris Kyle interview: I don’t know where [Obama's] going, but he’s definitely against the 2nd Amendment, and he’s trying to ban everything, so……… Good luck, ‘cause I’ve talked to a bunch of cops and Secret Service guys. They’re not going to go to anyone’s house, especially if they have guns. They don’t want to be knocking on doors. You start putting these bans in fact, these people don’t know anything about the guns, then you start thinking, “Who needs 30-round magazines?” Really? That’s just opening the doors, then you start taking more of our rights.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • Paddy O'furnitureFebruary 05, 2013 - 9:57 am

    Excellent letter Doc. OBTW all, the total of county sheriffs nationwide who have written letters of caution to the VEEP is, as of now, 322. Also of interest are the number of state legislators who are drafting legislation preempting anything construed as an infringement on the 2nd Amendment. You can find that on your own, but that's pretty significant also.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • R.J. CarterFebruary 06, 2013 - 8:41 am

    Capt. Romary....Great letter...Well said!!......

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • James E.February 06, 2013 - 10:53 am

    With three of my favorite peeps (a term I learned from a young person) commenting, I have to tread lightly here. Captain Romary, I think you seriously err when you recommend that military personnel refuse to do the handy work (?) because they are ordered to. As you well know, the military operates under the Uniform Code of Military Justice. Under our separate law, we must obey our superior officers with the only exception being that we may disobey an illegal order. Therein lies the rub -- what is an legal/illegal order? In my case, I would only refuse an order to commit a war crime. Now, when a member of the armed forces disobeys what he/she thinks is an illegal order, he damn well better be right or he will suffer the hard consequences (real jail time, not a civilian slap on the wrist). As a dentist I'm going to assume you commanded only dental assistants -- I hate to think what would happen if sailors of the line in war ships at sea followed your advice to follow only the orders they wanted to obey. Hung from the yardarm comes to mind. As for Michael Weiner's book, thank you but I'll pass. I do, however, miss his rants on the radio -- he always was entertaining. By the way, DDS identifies you as a dentist, but what does FAGD mean?

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • EvelynFebruary 06, 2013 - 11:08 am

    "Fellow" in the Academy of General Dentistry (FAGD) has been recognized by other general dentists as a leader and example to other dentists of the importance of quality continuing dental education to patient care. A general dentist who has earned the designation "Master" of the Academy of General Dentistry (MAGD) has completed a structured and demanding set of requirements involving all the dental disciplines.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • James E.February 06, 2013 - 11:11 am

    OK, Googled it: Fellow in the Academy of General Dentistry. Five hundred hours of continuing dental education, pass a test, and be member for three continuous years. Thinking more about sailors obeying only the orders they want to obey. Gun crews on the big guns refusing to fire, or those on the anti-aircraft guns refusing to fire. Aircraft mechanics refusing to work on returning shot up aircraft, and cooks refusing to cook. Sound like chaos putting the ship at risk. Not a good policy. Mr. Gibney, you were a sailor at sea -- tell us how obeying only the orders you want to obey works.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • James E.February 06, 2013 - 11:13 am

    Evelyn, I think peeps means friends.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • James E.February 06, 2013 - 11:19 am

    Mr. Gibney, also tell us about the brigs on ships. Run by very testy Marines as I recall.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • EvelynFebruary 06, 2013 - 11:28 am

    A "peep" is baby chick's request for food, or it is any particular sound at all, one of which the parent wants not from his child.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • James E.February 06, 2013 - 11:43 am

    Evelyn, true, but we are not chickens. Peeps to the young crowd means friends. And, oops, I did disobey an order in Vietnam that could have put me in jail. I've recounted it before -- a general ordering me to put my Infantry platoon deep in the jungle (beyond support) which would have caused the entire platoon to be lost. Luckily for me, I survived with my skin and my troops lived to fight another day. So, who was the general? Brigadier General Allen, forget his first name, but he was commander of the 173rd Airborne Brigade at the time -- his next assignment was as the Military Attache to Argentina. Think he retired after that assignment -- never made Major General.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • Ron BrayFebruary 15, 2013 - 7:10 am

    I guess I am one of the LBs referred to in the letter. Instead of matching the crazy rant that is the apparent style of this dentist, I will simply make a few points. The ability of regular citizens to own guns is guaranteed and isn't under threat by any of the current legislative discussions. However, it is well recognized that some limitations to gun ownership are constitutional (most felons are notallowed to own guns , citizens can't carry guns into courtrooms or on planes, and certain guns are prohibited). That is the current law and any minor changes to these restrictions as a result of proposed legislation are not only constitutional but in no way restrict the ability of normal citizens to own a gun. In our country, if someone violates the law, whether a gang banger in Oakland or a respected businessman in Placerville, they are subject to prosecution. This is true whether or not they have some delusion of a constitutional right to break the law. Just look at those who don't pay taxes based on some crazy constitutional argument. Just look at the results from Waco, Ruby Ridge, etc. Turns out these self-proclaimed patriots are just common criminals sadly out of step from the majority of our citizens. And any policeman or soldier who refuses to obey a lawful order should and will be punished. In a military system, soldiers cannot routinely choose which orders to follow. Lastly, the comment that owning assault weapons is a god-given right is so crazy that it is a waste of time to comment further.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • Paddy O'furnitureFebruary 15, 2013 - 8:12 am

    Ooooh, boy, it's only 8:00 am and I'm already behind the 8 ball. And I've got a headache so I'm a little cranky. James, how many currently-serving members of the US military have you polled about not obeying the above mentioned orders? I haven't spoken directly to any, but like you, I do a LOT of reading (though probably different sources) and virtually everything I've read tells me there is a strong dislike amongst many military and law enforcement types for any laws perceived as "2A unfriendly", and many have directly stated they would not, under any circumstances, participate in ANY kind of confiscation (though we all know it won't ever come to that). Having served yourself (in another century), I'll give you the benefit of doubt that you would probably be closer to the heartbeat of the military mindset then I, I think things have changed. There have been a great deal of goings on that have altered the mindset of those who serve, and it's not in the gov't and specifically the CIC's (commander in chief) favor. Remember James, you love Obama but most of those in the military don't. Don't let that cloud your vision, specifically in regards to this particular subject. ;^) BTW, I'm flattered to be called one of your favorite peeps (peeps being an endearing abbreviation for "people").

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • Paddy O'furnitureFebruary 15, 2013 - 8:26 am

    Now Ron Bray, your turn. You mentioned Ruby Ridge. What do you know about that episode? Do you know Randy and Vicky Weaver were not crazies, felons, or white supremacists? Do you know what Randy Weaver's crime was that brought down the weight of the Feds on him and resulted in his teenage son being back-shot dead out it the woods and his wife having her head blown halfway off while she held her baby in her arms in the doorway of her own home? FTA. Failure To Appear. That was it. What was he supposed to appear for? Sawing off the barrel of a shotgun owned by someone else (a federal agent posing as a "friend") and the request of said agent (a weapons charge he was later acquitted of!!!). That whole story stinks to high heaven and demonstrated the depravity and desperation of the feds in their efforts to make a bust-any ol' bust. Don't settle for the whitewashed media view of an event. Dog a little bit and get what Paul Harvey used to call "The Rest of the Story". If you haven't read the entire story-and you should-you have no place to comment on it. Read it and read several accounts of it (or you can watch numerous videos or documentaries on it if you prefer) to get a broader picture of how some of the agencies work. It will change your rosy little view of the FBI and BATF.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • EvelynFebruary 15, 2013 - 8:34 am

    Is anyone else noticing delayed publication of COMMENTS shown in ?

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • francescaduchamp@att.netFebruary 15, 2013 - 8:37 am

    Evelyn...yes--I try not to mess with it--when it does that...its why some of my comments repeat themselves. My problem is usually the server.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • Phil VeerkampFebruary 15, 2013 - 8:46 am

    Paddy, please quit ranting on Ruby Ridge. It will NEVER happen again. End of story. Get over it. We have drones now.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • Phil VeerkampFebruary 15, 2013 - 8:50 am

    Evelyn, I suspect that YOUR comments are being processed through Langley, NAS, defrag'ed through HAARP and reviewed by Dïck Cheney.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • RichardFebruary 15, 2013 - 8:51 am

    History will show that Sheriff D’Agostini’s political posturing on the issue of gun control will forever show him on the wrong side of history and forever a friend of the NRA and California Gun Owners Association.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • Phil VeerkampFebruary 15, 2013 - 8:51 am

    . . . NSA . . .

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • EvelynFebruary 15, 2013 - 8:58 am

    Phil: The delay has been WRT a number of posters. I think Fran is correct.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • RichardFebruary 15, 2013 - 9:59 am

    Sheriff D’Agostini’s political posturing on the issue of gun control will forever show him on the wrong side of history.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • Foamie Mouth®February 15, 2013 - 10:36 am

    Richard unpacking posture positions, total number being ONE, dressed up with different smiley faces.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • James E.February 15, 2013 - 10:51 am

    Paddy, my peep. I've never heard it described that way, but OMG, you're right, I was in the Army in the last century!!!!!! As to whether military personnel will follow or refuse orders I guess we will have to see. My experience is that military personnel follow orders 99.9% of the time. There are a few who don't, but they know their exposure under the UCMJ. It's a society of following orders, and when that crumbles it will just be a big mob. PFC Jones might BS to his buddies that he won't follow orders, but when he ponders that his actions make it PFC Jones vs. The United States of America, good sense will return. As for President Obama, I don't love him I just thought he was a better choice than Mitt, conversely you thought Mitt was the better choice. Ah, America. You mention having a headache. I haven't had a headache in years -- don't know why, but glad.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • Paddy O'furnitureFebruary 15, 2013 - 12:15 pm

    OBTW all, "Peeps" are also those disgusting yellow chick-shaped marshmallow thingies they start selling about this time every year for Easter. They're so bad even the dogs won't eat 'em. Pretty sure these are not what James is referring to either.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • Kirk MacKenzieFebruary 15, 2013 - 1:09 pm

    Paddy -- the only thing *those* peeps are good for are Peep Wars. Take two, stick a tooth pick in each, put them in the microwave a little ways apart, and bet on which one will use their weapon to destroy the other.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • Paddy O'furnitureFebruary 15, 2013 - 1:29 pm

    Kirk, LOL! I'll have to try that if my mini-peeps get any of those from the Easter Bunny. "Hey kids, watch this" (wife looks on disapprovingly). "Oh geez, what a hot gooey mess! Whose gonna clean THAT up?" (as dad leaves to tend to something important in the barn).

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • J. OthersideFebruary 15, 2013 - 8:52 pm

    Sigh. There are already gun confiscation programs in place: from convicted felons, mentally unstable, and any who are deeded unfit to own them. Law enforcement tracking them down and performing confiscations and arrests. As it should be as far as I can tell. Doesn't it follow that any greater disarmament push will be incremental expansions of this program? How are enforcement personnel going to distinguish that one incremental step over the line? It might be better served to help define that fine line rather than allude to the specter of agent armies kicking down doors to confiscate arms gestapo style.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • DeeFebruary 16, 2013 - 5:44 pm

    Don't any of you guys read the news?----Here is Minnesota proposed gun control pushed by Democrats----- •Gun control •confiscation •Minnesota •second amendment •inspection •gun rights . Advertisement Democrats in Minnesota are pushing a gun confiscation proposal that looks eerily similar to one recently proposed by Democrats in Missouri. According to the bill, anyone who, on February 1, 2013, legally owns or is in possession of an assault weapon has until September 1, 2013, to do any of the following without being subject to prosecution under Minnesota Statutes, section 624.7133: 1.remove the weapon from the state; 2.surrender the weapon to a law enforcement agency for destruction; 3.render the weapon permanently inoperable; or 4.if eligible, register the weapon as provided in Minnesota Statutes, section 624.7133, subdivision

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • DeeFebruary 16, 2013 - 5:57 pm

    Missouri----Democrats Rory Ellinger and Jill Schupp have introduced House Bill 545, a law that with the stroke of a pen will turn thousands of law-abiding Missourians into class C felons. It will ban the possession, sale, transfer or manufacture of semi-automatic rifles and magazines capable of holding more than ten rounds. The law is in effect de facto confiscation demanding the “surrender” of firearms to the government. “Any person who, prior to the effective date of this law, was legally in possession of an assault weapon or large capacity magazine shall have ninety days from such effective date to do any of the following without being subject to prosecution,” the proposed law states.” Residents will be ordered to “remove the assault weapon or large capacity magazine from the state of Missouri… Render the assault weapon permanently inoperable; or… Surrender the assault weapon or large capacity magazine to the appropriate law enforcement agency for destruction, subject to specific agency regulations.” These proposals have not passed yet,however, the Democrats will all they can to restrict or eliminate guns in the hands of law abiding citizens.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • RichardFebruary 16, 2013 - 7:43 pm

    Captain Romary: I do not support Sheriff D’Agostini for his juvenile antics and political posturing on gun control so I guess I cancel out your vote. No one is encroaching on the constitution other than Rush Limbaugh whose makings million’s fanning the flames of unrest among the feeble-minded. Captain, you talk of liberal fools, god given rights, distorting the truth, twisting our language, liberal agenda. You advise the defender of liberity to, “do what you know is right in your heart and soul. Refuse to do the handy work just because you are ordered to,” which sounds like advice that Gen. Custer would have given and doesn’t make any sense to a old Marine Rifle Platoon Sergeant like my self. Had you spent more time in the field and less in your air conditioned office you would understand that Marines don’t leave their posts, not in 1775, not in 1943, not in 1968, not in 2005 and not in the future. I have some suggestions Sir, turn your TV off, and try as hard as you can to get your head out of butt- and seek counseling at VA Mather. Your accomplishments suggest you’re an intelligent man; even intelligent people need help occasionally. Best regards,

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • RichardFebruary 16, 2013 - 8:42 pm

    Jay, my favorite Tea Party quote, ''Do you know, where does this phrase 'separation of church and state' come from? It was not in Jefferson's letter to the Danbury Baptists. ... The exact phrase 'separation of Church and State' came out of Adolph Hitler's mouth, that's where it comes from. So the next time your liberal friends talk about the separation of Church and State, ask them why they're Nazis.'' Glen Urquhart, the Tea Party-backed Republican nominee for the Delaware House

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • EvelynFebruary 16, 2013 - 9:28 pm

    Richard, I looked up Glen Urquhart, and apparently you have quoted him correctly. Cleverly, you conclude you can use the quote to make all Tea Party members appear foolish. Well, I also relish good quotes. NANCY PELOSI: (1)“Every week we don’t pass a Stimulus package, 500 million Americans lose their jobs.” (2)“Unemployment benefits are creating jobs faster than practically any other program” (3) “I think it’s unAmerican.” (to enforce immigration law). (3)“We have to pass the (health care) bill so you can find out what is in it”. BARACK OBAMA: (1)"We're the country that built the Intercontinental Railroad." (2"The Middle East is obviously an issue that has plagued the region for centuries." (3)"The reforms we seek would bring greater competition, choice, savings and inefficiencies to our health care system." (4)"What I was suggesting -- you're absolutely right that John McCain has not talked about my Muslim faith..." (5)"On this Memorial Day, as our nation honors its unbroken line of fallen heroes, I see many of them in the audience here today." (6)"I've now been in 57 states -- I think one left to go."

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • EvelynFebruary 16, 2013 - 9:54 pm

    BTW, Richard: What is the function of your posts?

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • James E.February 16, 2013 - 10:55 pm

    Evelyn, are you being contrary? Richard gives one, you return fire with ten. His is anti-Tea Party, yours are anti-Democrat. Can we now drop your veil of Independent? We know where Richard is, and we now know where Evelyn is. Perhaps you could redeem yourself by coming up with 11 anti-Republican quotes. Evelyn, I liked you more when you were in the middle, but guess none of us can hide our true feelings.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • James E.February 16, 2013 - 10:59 pm

    Wait, contrary is not the right word. Argumentative would be most correct. As example, if I say the sun comes up in the East, you will quickly counter with multiple sites that disagree. Yes, argumentative.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • EvelynFebruary 17, 2013 - 6:53 am

    James, your misreading of my intention is understandable. Herewith: I hate smear politics, which is what most people engage in. It is quite unfair to brand a whole group with the error of one person. Issues matter. I do not brand all Republicans simply because our 43rd President, while in office, said: (1) "You teach a child to read, and he or her will be able to pass a literacy test." (2) I am here to make an announcement that this Thursday, ticket counters and airplanes will fly out of Ronald Reagan Airport." (3) "You know, one of the hardest parts of my job is to connect Iraq to the war on terror." (4) "I'm the commander -- see, I don't need to explain -- I do not need to explain why I say things. That's the interesting thing about being president." (5) "Oh, no, we're not going to have any casualties." --discussing the Iraq war. (6) "I know how hard it is for you to put food on your family." (7) "Do you have blacks, too?" --to Brazilian President Fernando Cardoso, Washington, D.C., Nov. 8, 2001 (8) "I know the human being and fish can coexist peacefully." (9) "I would say the best moment of all was when I caught a 7.5 pound largemouth bass in my lake." --on his best moment in office, interview with the German newspaper Bild am Sonntag, May 7, 2006 (10)"Families is where our nation finds hope, where wings take dream." (11) "See, in my line of work you got to keep repeating things over and over and over again for the truth to sink in, to kind of catapult the propaganda." (12) "People say, how can I help on this war against terror? How can I fight evil? You can do so by mentoring a child; by going into a shut-in's house and say I love you." (13) "Goodbye from the world's biggest polluter." --in parting words to world leaders at his final G-8 Summit, punching the air and grinning widely as those present looked on in shock, Rusutsu, Japan, July 10, 2008 (14) "I don't know where bin Laden is. I have no idea and really don't care. It's not that important. It's not our priority." ********** BTW, James, "being in the middle" is safe. Stay safe.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • EvelynFebruary 17, 2013 - 7:28 am

    On the “liking” business, James, have you noticed that in campaigns “likability” (expensive PR required) is what candidates seek to project? I would LIKE to replace “likability” with RESPECT stemming from honest debate & analysis as well as intelligible policies not crafted by lobbyists. However …………… It would be argumentative to ask you to say anything positive (sarcasm excluded) about each of the several political groupings. And I'd bet you could come up with NOTHING for the Tea Party. But I will. From what I can tell, Tea Party members are disillusioned with the policies of both dominant parties and possibly have a better idea than most of where "politics as usual" is taking us. Tea Party members can attest to the fact that I have never attended one of their meetings, though I don't count my failure to do so as a personal plus. I could probably learn something. A friend of mine attends meetings of all three groups. She is one of the best informed people I've met. Sometimes it helps to swim outside one’s own fishbowl.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • Phil VeerkampFebruary 17, 2013 - 7:32 am

    Good morning, Colonel. With regard to “argumentative” may I offer this supplemental to your very keen observation? A couple of months ago I presented “eristic” to this forum as word-of-the-day. - LINK - Eristic - from the ancient Greek word Eris . . . type of argument where the participants fight and quarrel without any reasonable goal. The aim usually is to win the argument and/or to engage into a conflict for the sole purpose . . .

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • EvelynFebruary 17, 2013 - 7:40 am

    .............. Thank you for extending the conversation sparked by Richard's comment. Examination of uncivil discourse, blinkered politics and the destructive left/right paradigm merits much more discussion.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • EvelynFebruary 17, 2013 - 7:45 am

    Point of clarification: Mine at 7:40am was a follow on to 6:53am & 7:28am.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • Phil VeerkampFebruary 17, 2013 - 8:04 am

    LINK - Q.E.D. - I rest my case.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • EvelynFebruary 17, 2013 - 9:08 am

    PROTECTING THE PRESIDENT? "Marines Were Disarmed for President Obama's Second Inaugural Parade" - HERE

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • EvelynFebruary 17, 2013 - 9:12 am

    PROTECTING THE DEFENSE SECRETARY? A year ago, while visiting Afghanistan, "a sergeant major abruptly told the Marines gathered to hear Mr. Panetta in a tent at Camp Leatherneck to get up, place their M-16 and M-4 automatic rifles and 9-millimeter pistols outside, and return unarmed. The sergeant major, Brandon Hall, told reporters that he was acting on orders." - HERE

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • EvelynFebruary 17, 2013 - 9:18 am

    VIDEO (1 min): "Ted Turner - I Think It's Good U.S. Troops are Killing Themselves.............." - HERE ********** I trust it's unnecessary to clarify that I DO NOT endorse Mr. Turner's statement.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • DeeFebruary 17, 2013 - 12:46 pm

    Evelyn-Here is a quote from Ken Cuccinelli,who is the Attorney General for the Commonwealth of Virginia.He was one of the first Tea Party candidates in 2009. I think that it is one of the most clarifing statements on the Tea Party I have read.----------------"The Tea Party is principle-focused, not majority-focused like the Democrats or Republicans. Republicans and Democrats exist to get a majority. I don't. I'm in politics to advance the Founders' mission in the 21st century. And sometimes that has me working with Democrats, and sometimes with republicans. I’m glad that there is some overlap between the Tea Party and the Republicans, but they aren't always in agreement. And the Tea Party continues to feel that they are outside that process, and they bring their own form of accountability in nominations and elections."

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • EvelynFebruary 17, 2013 - 1:33 pm

    Thank you, Dee. How utterly reasonable. (But, never let a good smear go to waste.)

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • NancyFebruary 17, 2013 - 1:55 pm

    Thank you, Dennis Romary, DDS, for you military service. And thank you, Sheriff John for your service to our county and your stand on the gun issue. Sheriff John IS on the right side of history.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • EvelynFebruary 17, 2013 - 7:21 pm

    Hello, James. I'm hoping to be pronounced "redeemed" by your good self yourself before day's end.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • James E.February 17, 2013 - 7:30 pm

    Evelyn, you are a tad redeemed for listing the Republican quotes. But, not totally redeemed as you listed the Republican quotes only after you were prodded. Nevertheless, try to stay on the center line as you can research both sides.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • James E.February 17, 2013 - 7:37 pm

    I've sent a Letter to the Editor response to the good doctor's advice to military personnel. Bottom line, I suggested the doctor restrict his advice to Navy personnel in Dental Clinics. Made no comment about his Tea Party rant, just his advice for military personnel to obey only the orders they like.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • EvelynFebruary 17, 2013 - 8:52 pm

    James: Partial redemption is better than none at all, and I do thank you. But Republican quotes should have been offered in the first instance? That's your slippery lawyerly self speaking!!!

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • EvelynFebruary 18, 2013 - 7:57 am

    James: This is dedicated to you. Paul Craig Roberts singles out Republicans. Both parties, however, are culpable. Let the article stand in the stead of a thousand stupid, useless quotations. Fair and balanced, right down the middle on our way to perdition.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • EvelynFebruary 18, 2013 - 9:52 am

    DEMOCRAT Charles Rangel proposes bringing back the draft, to include women 18-25. HERE

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • James E.February 18, 2013 - 10:38 am

    Evelyn, given that women can now serve in combat it seems appropriate that they register for the draft. By the way, I do not agree that women should serve in the Infantry or Armor -- until you've been there, it's brutal and not a bit like in the movies. Richard will attest.

    Reply | Report abusive comment


Herard over the back fence: Try fishing at Wakamatsu

By Bob Billingsley | From Page: B1

Downtown group coordinates painting, awnings

By Wendy Schultz | From Page: A1

More mountain lion sightings reported

By Dawn Hodson | From Page: A1, 8 Comments

Supervisor Nutting trial begins

By Cole Mayer | From Page: A1, 71 Comments | Gallery

Sanford murder case to jury

By Cole Mayer | From Page: A1 | Gallery

Gearing tax questions to correct office saves time

By Treasurer-Tax Collector | From Page: A3



My turn: More than a buzzword

By Special to the Democrat | From Page: A4, 23 Comments

Building restored

By Mountain Democrat | From Page: A4

Outstanding dog

By Mountain Democrat | From Page: A4



National Day of Prayer

By Letters to the Editor | From Page: A5, 2 Comments

‘Parents, be afraid’ letter

By Letters to the Editor | From Page: A5, 20 Comments

Ukranian situation

By Letters to the Editor | From Page: A5, 4 Comments


By Letters to the Editor | From Page: A5, 9 Comments

Altshuler framing

By Letters to the Editor | From Page: A5, 9 Comments



Pitching the ‘Root’ cause of Trojans’ victory

By Mike Bush | From Page: A6 | Gallery

Pedal power at the forefront next month

By Jerry Heinzer | From Page: A6 | Gallery

Outside with Charlie: Transitioning

By Charlie Ferris | From Page: A6

Sports Scene: April 22, 2014

By Democrat Staff | From Page: A7

Roundup: April 22, 2014

By Democrat Staff | From Page: A7



4-H’ers star at showcase

By Dawn Hodson | From Page: B1 | Gallery

At a glance: Look for fireballs

By Mimi Escabar | From Page: B2, 1 Comment

Authors to share their stories

By Pat Lakey | From Page: B2, 2 Comments

Church to host human trafficking conference

By Pollock Pines | From Page: B3

Grow For It! Flower of Easter

By Barbara Schuchart | From Page: B5



Crime Log: April 1-3

By Cole Mayer | From Page: A2

Weather stats 4-22-14

By Michael Raffety | From Page: A2

Building permits 4/7-11/2014

By Michael Raffety | From Page: A2



Bobby Lloyd Bridges

By Contributor | From Page: A2

Harry Frank Harper

By Contributor | From Page: A2, 6 Comments

Marion “Wayne” Griswold

By Contributor | From Page: A2


Real Estate




By Contributor | From Page: A8

New York Times Crossword

By Contributor | From Page: A8

Flying McCoys

By Contributor | From Page: A8

Speed Bump

By Contributor | From Page: A8


By Contributor | From Page: A8

Horoscope, Thursday, April 24, 2014

By Contributor | From Page: A8

Horoscope, Wednesday, April 23, 2014

By Contributor | From Page: A8

Working It Out

By Contributor | From Page: A8

TV Listings

By Contributor | From Page: A8


By Contributor | From Page: A8


By Contributor | From Page: A8