Comments

buster ramazani ss 526-772-2565 donor wrote on May 15, 2009 4:00 PM:

" So, Cailia, do you think the rules for this blog should be changed? It seems like there should be some way of protecting those who wish to stay anonymous from your put-downs when they don’t see eye to eye with you in every respect. "




celia wrote on May 13, 2009 6:23 AM:

" Wow. I seemed to have ruffled the feathers of someone else who does not say their name. My point on that is: to write a letter in the paper, one must give their full name, address and phone number.I support that as it has accountability. On the blog, people make up names and it gets out of control with name calling and talk that makes my one sentance look very nice. It's easier to do that when you hide behind a fake name.But that's the way it is. Sooooo, no named people say crazy stuff.... "




to celia wrote on May 12, 2009 7:43 PM:

" Celia, where am I to find all those people who hang onto every word that passes between you and WC? Do I need them to tell me that WC has problems? WC makes that apparent on his or her own. When you let an idiot rile you, you risk looking like an idiot yourself. . . Oh, and yes, I’m WC. Everyone who isn’t behind you in virtually everything you do is WC. Talk about paranoid "de"lusions . . . "




thinker wrote on May 12, 2009 6:04 PM:

" Yup, I think Celia just about summed it up about that WC person. In fact, if we ever find out who WC is, maybe we will take a collection to pay for the much needed therapy.... "




celia wrote on May 12, 2009 3:26 PM:

" RE: tDnTH or wc? Ask those who have been following the statements of "wise" counselor if my statement is inaccurate. When WC does not state their name, it's impossible to make a personal attack. WC does exibit an exagerated sense of self importance and makes some pretty paranoid statements. If you have read the history of statements made by WC you would see what I'm talking about. But think what you will...btw you did not state your mane either....are you WC??? "




tDnTH wrote on May 11, 2009 11:05 AM:

" Celia, that’s just mean. You didn’t need to say anything at all. "




celia wrote on May 11, 2009 5:56 AM:

" "wise" counselor
Really. get therapy for your paranoid illusions and exagerated sense of self importance.... "




Wise Counselor wrote on May 10, 2009 10:03 PM:

" Well here we are again with evidence that as soon as Al Steuart writes, it is printed right away, either in the newspaper or here on this blog. The count now for unpublished letters to the editor; on this blog is getting up in numbers of ones not agreeing with his ideas; i.e. the editor prints what Al says, but the rest can take a flyin' leap! How fair is this? I think it stinks! Is this newspaper supposed to cater to the new liberals (progressives) all the time? Why does Al get printed right away? "




Al Steuart wrote on May 10, 2009 2:41 PM:

" Re: Celebrating God's love. Please note that I am not uneducated regarding the Bible or theology - graduated from Duke University with a BA in Theology and served three years as a Methodist pastor - but when I learned how to use critical thinking and the scientific method, I "put away my childish" thinking and stopped believing in spirits. If your "god" is so loving, then why would he or she be so concerned with "sin" - your god's love is "conditional" (meaning not "all loving")- I would not like a human who acted like your god! "




Hannah Shapero wrote on Apr 30, 2009 8:47 PM:

" Ayn Rand loved skyscrapers not only for their phallic erectness, but because they symbolized what she thought was best about Western civilization. I find, when I look at Rand these days, that her value is not as a moral or philosophical guide, but as a kind of impressionist painter in blazing words and images. "




ken wrote on Apr 30, 2009 1:12 PM:

" and why do we need to see phallic imagery? "




Tfmf4 wrote on Apr 30, 2009 10:52 AM:

" Great. Homework. How about we see The Fountainhead instead? Ayn Rand wrote the script, based on her novel. It has Gary Cooper in it and a lot of great phallic imagery. "




Atlas Shrugged wrote on Apr 29, 2009 7:07 PM:

" There is a book named such as the above name, it is written in the 1940's by a woman named Ayn Rand. The ones who would have what they call "equality before reward" to those who formed this Union of the United States, should read this book and then decide if they want the result; all America without source of income, all America in despair, all Americans without hope nor faith in recovery. Read the book and then decide if you want the end result which is being played out in the world today. "




Mac wrote on Apr 28, 2009 6:09 PM:

" To tQBqm: Why can I not be what I am, a married (for 21 years) heterosexual female, and also support Mr. Steuart's "agenda"? It's not either/or for me; his being married doesn't make me any less so. True, the people of California have voted twice. And they will keep voting until they finally get it right. The generation coming up is much more open minded than the previous ones; it is only a matter of time. Until then, if you don't want your referendums overturned in the courts, make sure they pass legal muster before presenting them to the people. "




Mac wrote on Apr 28, 2009 5:58 PM:

" Oh good grief! Mr. Steuart had the "audacity" to marry his longtime partner. Because this was an important event, it was on the front page of the paper. So what? How many longtime het marriages have been celebrated in our paper? Are those people also proudly displaying their sexual preferences? "




Christ Our Bunny wrote on Apr 28, 2009 11:44 AM:

" Good for Landmark that it doesn’t “inquire into the sex lives of charity recipients”. My sympathies, though, to any un-closeted gay recipient whose eating might be construed as advancing an agenda. "




9DDjj6 wrote on Apr 28, 2009 11:02 AM:

" Chad: You say it isn’t your policy to influence people regarding which charities to support, but conclude your post discouraging donations to the Compassion Caravan on the grounds that a homosexual is involved there. You’re just as openly bigoted as Al Steuart is openly gay. At least he talks straight. "




to Chad wrote on Apr 28, 2009 8:10 AM:

" Please enlighten me...how exactly is collecting food for our three organizations who give food to the people who can't afford it,about advancing homosexuality? Do you also think then they Al is attempting to "recruit" homosexuals? Obsurd. "




celia wrote on Apr 28, 2009 7:46 AM:

" People speak volumes about themselves without realizing it. When someone accuses Al of "advancing homosexuality" as motive for feeding hungry people,it says more about the writer than it does about Al.Makes me wonder about their motives.And just what exactly is meant by that term? By insisting people be like you are you advancing heterosexuality? And every time you mention your spouse and wear a ring, are you "announcing your sexual preference"? I suggest that bloggers confes their sin of bigotry so they may be healed of the accompanying sins of arregance, condescending attitudes,greed, judgement etc. I'll pray for you. "




tQBqm wrote on Apr 28, 2009 7:12 AM:

" Gee Mac, on one hand you support the agenda of Mr. Steuart then you say that you and the other writer can walk down the street with your wives. Which are you in support of, homosexuals, or in support of the kind of marriage which is as old as the earth is? I don't think one can walk the top of the fence on this issue, either it is right or it is wrong. The public has voted twice in this state not to call marriage between two of the same sex a legal marriage. Doesn't that count? "




Chad Whiteley wrote on Apr 28, 2009 6:26 AM:

" There are dozens of charities in Kern County that handle their business without announcing the sexual preference of their leaders. Mr. Steuart has done more than casually walk down the street with his significant other. He has forced himself on the community proudly displaying his sexual preference.

In the case of Steuart's charity, he is just a middle man. It simply is not a problem to carry the same goods directly to the actual charity without him. "




Mac wrote on Apr 27, 2009 10:59 PM:

" Why should Mr. Steuart hide who he is? He and his partner got married, it was an historic event - why shouldn't they celebrate it just as a het couple would celebrate a landmark anniversary? Would you say such a couple was advancing a heterosexual agenda and find all their activities therefore suspect? You and I take it for granted that we can walk down the street with our spouses, they do so and it's "advancing an agenda". "




Chad Whiteley wrote on Apr 27, 2009 10:10 PM:

" Landmark does not make a policy of telling people which charities to support. We do not expect anyone to be free of sin and recognize that bringing order to social chaos requires us to use channels that may not be perfect. Thus, we don't inquire into the sex lives of charity recipients.

In the case of Mr Steuart, we are not the ones who announced his sexual preference. While I will not tell someone who to finance, I am left wondering if Mr. Steuart's charity is more about advancing homosexuality than feeding the hungry. "




Sandy wrote on Apr 27, 2009 9:44 PM:

" Gotta love the Kern River Valley. It's like life in the 1950's, with tons of crackheads and drunks mixed in.

I don't care if the devil himself, started a food bank. It doesn't matter. This is about feeding hungry people!

What is wrong with all of you?

And yes, by all means....GET TO THE PART WHERE JESUS BECOMES A BUNNY! "




2JthB wrote on Apr 27, 2009 7:58 PM:

" Get to the part where Christ becomes a bunny. "




htL44 wrote on Apr 27, 2009 2:32 PM:

" So you support some hungry children, just not the ones supported by Mr. Steuart. Are you speaking on behalf of your church? "




Mac wrote on Apr 27, 2009 12:27 PM:

" If one gives in other ways, that is great. However, to not support an organization soley because one of the people involved is gay is petty and small, and I would hope most Christians would rise above that type of behavior. "




Chad Whiteley wrote on Apr 27, 2009 8:29 AM:

" Nobody is asking children to go hungry because of Steuart's sexual preference. I have personally overseen the donation of tons of perishable goods to Operation Blessing, Golden Empire Gleaners and other similar organizations.

Just because someone chooses not to support Mr. Steuart does not mean he does not support hungry children. The Bible commands us to support those who are in need. "




2JthB wrote on Apr 25, 2009 2:06 PM:

" So Adam made a contract with God, and chose death over God. Then God entered the world as Jesus and died a brutal death to impress upon us that Adam had made the wrong choice. Then God impressed us further by rising from the grave. Gee, I’m impressed. Now get to the part about God wanting us to let children go hungry on account of Mr. Steuart’s being gay. "