Comments

To the Tax guy wrote on Jul 12, 2009 12:03 AM:

" Wow, what a unique idea! I like your way of thinking, it should prove to seperate those who "are really in love" from those who just want to live "outside the norm!" It also would prove who really is serious about the issue and who is just "mouthing abuse about the issue." I am straight and am married, I would pay $5000 just to be married to my opposite sex partner, why not a tax for both--good idea, that should also prove to those naysayers that say it is a religious issue. (Even though it is!) "




TAX GUY wrote on Jul 11, 2009 6:13 PM:

" I SAY, LET THEY GAY COUPLES GET MARRIED AND IMPOSE A GAY TAX MARRIAGE OF $5000.00. Per couple, we tax everything else why not that......... "




Ann wrote on Jul 11, 2009 10:18 AM:

" opie, glad to hear you are still around. I missed you.
I am reviewing the 52 items that Constitutionalist referred to below and am beginning to write letters and make telephone calls. I did so proactively in the 90's but became discouraged because I am only one person and did not see much action/results from my efforts "




opie wrote on Jul 10, 2009 10:20 AM:

" Hi, you guys! I’ll be back real soon. I’ve spent a great couple hours catching up on all the discussions and really feel like I’m missing out. Area Republican: Please don’t go. Celia: I’m more in sympathy with you than ever on this marriage thing. So far I don’t want to marry anybody. But if I did it would be Goober for sure. And if Aunt Bea tried to stop us—if she even wanted a say in the matter—that would turn me into one pissy old queen pretty quick. "




Marilyn wrote on Jul 7, 2009 8:03 AM:

" Constitutionalist - Thanks for clearing that up. I obviously misread your post. "




Ann wrote on Jul 6, 2009 7:54 PM:

" Where is opie? I have missed him this past going on two weeks.

Constitutionalist/Area Republican, I am quite sure my lack of intelligent remedies to our struggling State economy is frustrating and, my somewhat (yes, somewhat) liberal take on things really annoys you both. My comments tend to be liberal, but my politics tend to favor conservatism, especially with regard to economics. My email address is Annkrv51@yahoo.com. Please educate me if you are so inclined to invest the time... I am hungry to learn your thoughts in detail. "




Constitutionalist wrote on Jul 5, 2009 4:16 AM:

" Marylin, sorry for the confusion. The republician party wants to get rid of all low cost health insurance for children in CA with a saving of 231 million a year. It will cost one billion to treat these same kids at emergency wards instead. I'm dead set against not having health care for kids or adults, especially when it cost four times as much.
That is my point about asking the others posting here to look into the 52 disputed items in the CA budget. It is all online. If you post here you can find it. "




Marilyn wrote on Jul 4, 2009 10:19 AM:

" To Consitutionalist (I'm just going with the spelling) Your confusion confuses me. I don't understand why someone would want to save money and take affordable health care away from children. I'm pretty sure nobody votes this out because it is inhumane. So when you say it's inhumane, do you mean to you or kids? Kids who have regular health care grow up to be healthier and less of a drain on your pocket book anyway, so what's the problem? Health care is NOT affordable and a problem, but everyone agrees it should be available to kids. Well... most of us. "




Consitutionalist wrote on Jul 3, 2009 9:10 PM:

" Let's try again. Instead of personal blithering, how many of the 52 disputed items in our deadlocked legislature does anyone posting here know?
How about each contributor picking one item, and educating the rest of us on the consequences, or not, for the folks in our valley.
e.g Getting rid of all low cost child health insurance. Saves 231 million, costs one billion. Why do republicans vote for this 400% tax increase idea?
Why don't I hear the people posting here up in arms about such a costly and seemingly inhumane idea. Conservatives, please defend this republican idea. "




Ann wrote on Jul 2, 2009 9:16 PM:

" I missed the original post by Celia JUNI.. where was it? As for Area Rep wrong again... are you a chicken like the rest of us that do not use our full names (which, in your case, is not a given name unless your folks named you Area Republican, Area Rep, Area, or Area Rep wrong again)? Just asking. This blog is now getting out of control so, later, bud. "




celia madison wrote on Jul 2, 2009 6:43 PM:

" "Who's on first?"If everyone would just have some gonads and use their real names, we could avoid this confusion.I always use my first name and will now add last. Oh"area rep" I'm so glad you don't think I'm "chicken" because I use my real name"not like other chickens here"...ummm like"area rep"? Is that your real name? "




Area Rep wrong again wrote on Jul 2, 2009 5:29 PM:

" You REALLY need to stop assuming things bud....there are two Celia's.....who, by the way, use their real names....not like other chicken's here. "




CELIA JUNI wrote on Jul 2, 2009 4:45 PM:

" Editor:A Suggestion,is there any way you can check the senders E-Mail address befor you post comments. Thanks "




Celia Madison wrote on Jul 2, 2009 2:32 PM:

" My name, Celia Madison. My title, civil rights activist.My residence, Kernville. I participate in other blogs and they all have at least some accountability attached. You may still use a cover name, but you must fill out a form that states who you are, address, email etc, not unlike what is required to write a letter to the Sun. That way, at least the editor may trace the blogger in the event of threat and only one blogger can use each address,avoiding the multipul personalities that appear to be cropping up here. Thanks again for this forum. "




Editor wrote on Jul 2, 2009 12:57 PM:

" It seems we have another "Opie/opie" type situation developing again. This time it's Celia, who's been blogging from Day 1, and Celia Juni. We also have Area Republican and Area Rep. Any suggestions from the parties involved? Thanks. "




Area Republican wrote on Jul 2, 2009 10:15 AM:

" Celia: Or should I say Celia Juni......I am not the only one that uses a name other then my real name to not be persecuted by you "libs" and labeled and maleigned, etc. etc. etc. So, now which REALLY ARE YOU? "




celia wrote on Jul 2, 2009 5:17 AM:

" RE: "Area"(republican?) You said before that "this is my last post here". Hmmm, let me try to understand this. So by dropping a word from your made up name, does that make you a different person?Is this the "logic" that lets you lie? So just which one of your many personalities went to the voting booth?Oh I can't wait to see who answers... "




Ann wrote on Jul 1, 2009 8:40 PM:

" Area Republican, my name is Sans the "e" at the end... but, that being said, I do hope to hear more from you if you can sustain from bashing other's beliefs, lifssyles and political affiliations I learned years ago that many of the values that I once held true are being justifiably refuted and by some who cannot gracefully accept change. Let's gracefully accept change and move on. Let's have a cohesive population that respects differences and chooses to live side-by-side with those who differ in their opinions. I personally want that so much. "




celia wrote on Jul 1, 2009 8:01 PM:

" RE: "Area"Hmmmm, I don't recall saying that you were not a religious zealot, but you state the I am "correct", so I must deduct from this that you think something I've written is correct and to that I say "thanks". I'm not quite sure what gripe you have with Ann and I fail to see how the editor is a religious zealot. As to why some of your post don't make it, parhaps they are "offensive, off-topic or redundant". Whatever the reason, I highly doubt that the absence of such comments are a loss to the editor or anyone else. "




Area wrote on Jul 1, 2009 5:59 PM:

" To Celia and Anne, you would have more comments from me here but the Editor does not like me and at times refuses to let my comments be printed even though they are as simple & common as what the two of you print. Oh well, that is her loss! Yes, Celia, you are correct, I am not a religious zealot, but the Editor is! "




Ann to celia wrote on Jul 1, 2009 1:21 PM:

" Constitutionalist (who oftentimes spells his "handle" wrong) was referring most likely to my Posts on the Protect California's Social Services blog. It confuses me, though, because I was not discussing Religion more than a passing comment. I do more than talk about issues... I vote. I am more than saddened by the mentality of some members of our communities who post here. The hatred and intolerance are UNBELIEVABLE. And, to think that I probably stand in line with some of these folks at the check-out counters of the local markets. "




celia wrote on Jul 1, 2009 8:19 AM:

" RE: constitutionalist. I respect what you are saying and think it is well worth thinking about. While I've seen "area republican" spout off crazy religious talk, I've not seen that from Ann, at least not on this blog.Do you have her confused with someone else? "




Constitutionalist wrote on Jun 30, 2009 9:09 PM:

" To Ann, Area Rep etc. There are 52 items in dispute in our state budget. Many that will serious impact people in this valley.
How many do you know about? Why aren't you writing about old people in our valley being thrown out of their homes if the Republicans have their way? Why don't I hear about low cost child health care going away, to then create a 400% higher child care cost at the emergency ward? (Another Republican idea)
How about stop talking about religion and start practicing it? What do you do in our community besides talk? "




celia wrote on Jun 30, 2009 8:42 PM:

" thank you Ann! I'm the only family member who blogs.
area rep.Does "chill out"="shut up"?No wonder it seems we read a different bible.If voters voted to give you permission,or not, to baptise people in your church, that would be news and affect you personally. Ranting and raving about law abiding citizens harming noone is not news, it's pathetic.
Truth: you need a new name that doesn't lie.There are way more heterosexual images in this paper than Gay ones. Wow, one different picture and suddenly the paper is bias toward Gays.
Area rep: please keep your word. "




Editor wrote on Jun 30, 2009 5:56 PM:

" To Area Rep: I didn't read anything in Celia's post that told you to shut up; chill out, yes, but not 'shut up.' I don't know how to make the difference between 'rights' and 'beliefs' any clearer. They are two separate and distinct concepts.
To Truth: The reporting of gay marriage (right here in our corner of the world!) was news. Didn't you see/read all the coverage the story got in other media? Our job is to report the news. We may not always like or agree with the story, but it's our job to report on it. "




The Truth wrote on Jun 30, 2009 10:43 AM:

" Editor: I don't think your reply to Area is correct/fair; you are prejudicial in favor of gays. And it shows in all your comments regarding this issue, you are prejudiced against anything that has to do with what "you call Religion,"
and have been since you started working for this newspaper. Before you became "Editor" this newspaper at least "tolerated both views" since you have been monitoring both Editorial and all printed material, news has been biased. Did not the censure of this valley affect/educate you when you printed the front page color photo of 2 gay men marrying? "




Area Republican wrote on Jun 30, 2009 12:19 AM:

" Celia: you have no right to tell me to shut up, you do not own this newspaper!

Editor: you are saying it is ok to talk about being gay but not to talk about religion-you have violated my "civil rights and my freedom to speak!"

To all: This is my last post here. "




Ann to celia wrote on Jun 29, 2009 10:06 PM:

" I watched your video on Youtube a few minutes ago. You looked great and what a great sense of humor for speaking your opinion and truth. I admire your intelligence in your posts and wish you the best... congratulations on your anniversary and your personal convictions, which you do not hide behind but put forward. While I do not choose that lifestyle for myself, I do respect yours. Does your wife post here? Also, congratulations on the YouTube video... quite funny and it was nice to put a face to the postings you submit. "




celia wrote on Jun 28, 2009 4:22 PM:

" Editor. Thank you for the explination. I understand the need for some boundries and it makes sense. I respect the forum you provide and hope no one abuses it.
Area rep. The day that voters take away your civil rights is the day you have a right to protest. Until then, chill out and give the editor a break. "




Editor wrote on Jun 28, 2009 1:44 PM:

" We will be addressing the issue of 'keeping things local' in the near future. For now, in response to Area Rep's post here's the difference. Gays writing about legislation that affects their civil rights (it's a legal matter for the legislature or courts to decide) is quite different from writing about one's religious and moral beliefs. It's not a matter of free speech, rather many of our readers and bloggers were just plain tired of religious zealots condemning others' behavior and/or trying to convert those darn sinners to the "right" or "one and only" religion. "




celia wrote on Jun 28, 2009 8:57 AM:

" RE: area republican. Have you noticed that I have not written letters lately?In fact, since the decision to keep it local was expressed, I have not seen anything about some illusive gay lifestyle in the Sun. Oh those confounded facts....And what exactly IS expressing what we like about that non discript "gay lifestyle"? I'm Gay and I sure don't know what that lifestyle is.Now, let's go back to talking about that local guy Michael Jackson... "




Area Republican wrote on Jun 28, 2009 12:08 AM:

" I have a question for the Editor: why is it the gays can write about favoring any legislation that validates their agenda, but this article reads that religious views or life styles are not tolerated...please explain as I am not sure why they can express they like that lifestyle but we who believe in the Bible cannot write our views? Just looking for your opinion and not to start a "fire" but I am interested in equality regarding "freedom of speech." "




Realistically yours wrote on Jun 25, 2009 8:58 AM:

" I agree, let's get some opinions of real people, people that work for a living every day and have for most of their lives...teens that have problems with their parents because they both use and sell drugs; where to start looking for a job outside this valley because there are no jobs here; addressing the issue of Obama's "new volunteer ideas"....and other issues that really challenge the everyday person, not just the one who sits on this blog all day! "




thinker wrote on Jun 24, 2009 6:23 AM:

" E GAD another boring opinion page! Question: If we are keeping the focus local, why do we have letters from people who don't live in the KRV?

If LOCAL people are affected by state or national issues, is that local enough?

Please bring back the Al and Celia's of the KRV.They may tick some people off but they are not boring and they stir things up...and they are LOCAL. "




celia wrote on Jun 23, 2009 1:56 PM:

" Wow! Thank you Opie, Peg and Thinker. My poem is "Celia Madison vs proposition H8 youtube".It was not planned on the schedule but we threw it in at the last minute. So I'm a little rusty and I forgot one of the best lines."Hypricrates! Confess your lies, take the log out of your eyes!" And while you are at it, "Betty Bowers explains traditional marriage to everyone else" also on youtube.BTW after the contest, a man came up to me with tears in his eyes and apologized for voting yes on H8. I have hope! "




Im wondering...... wrote on Jun 23, 2009 11:47 AM:

" What is the U-tube site where Celia put a poem....let the rest of us know please! "




thinker wrote on Jun 23, 2009 9:09 AM:

" That poem rocks! Bet you did not enter it in the local poetry contest.... "




Peg wrote on Jun 23, 2009 7:12 AM:

" ~~~~~ Hi five to Celia! "




celia wrote on Jun 22, 2009 12:38 PM:

" Told you I'd keep you posted and yes I'm on youtube,138 views so far.Hope it gets people to think before the next election. "




opie wrote on Jun 18, 2009 2:51 PM:

" Empathy, something near identification, and above all CONGRATULATIONS (on your wife’s and your anniversary!!!) from opie to Celia! "




celia wrote on Jun 18, 2009 10:04 AM:

" Re: answer I really don't think that this valley is a shining example of"procreating accordingly". High drug problem, domestic violence,child abuse, generations of welfare families etc. Anti Gay marriage does not automatically equate to high moral standards. And really the only ones who should have a vote on my marriage is my wife and I. Is it possible for you to imagine strangers voting on YOUR marriage and denying you that right? Can you muster up any imagination as to what that might feel like?Empathy anyone? "




celia wrote on Jun 18, 2009 9:42 AM:

" opie your'e fun!
Hey everyone, my wife and I joined several others in Bako to renew our wedding vows.Yesturday was our 1year anniversary! And someone video taped my poetry slam performance and looks like it will be on youtube I'll keep you posted.

re:150 in valley support same sex marriage. Peg, opie, people who make up numbers like that don't appear to possess the "fact gene" and it's impossible to have a reasonable conversation with them. As the old set in their ways crowd dies off, the younger, more open ones will vote and we will have equality. "




opie wrote on Jun 17, 2009 7:53 PM:

" Answer to question: So there were 150 No votes? How did you figure that? I miss Celia already. "




Answer to question wrote on Jun 17, 2009 5:06 PM:

" Peg, all you have to do is look at the last vote, this valley overwhelmingly voted yes on Prop. 8, i.e. that means this valley has lived by the moral/biblical code that a man marrys a woman and procreates accordingly. There is nothing but condemnation for those who co-habit with same sex couple for the purposes of living as a "married couple" in the bible, but as I have explained to you, for oh so many times, most people don't believe in same-sex marriage, everyone let those people live and let live for eons...give it a rest...please! "




Peg wrote on Jun 10, 2009 3:10 PM:

" "in this valley as there are only about 150 people who think that marriage involves anyone but a man and a woman"....may I see the evidence of your statistic gathering? "




thinker wrote on Jun 10, 2009 11:41 AM:

" hey I'm still here. Read todays paper and, well, kind of boring. And just can't get into the idea of forcing cats to get married. "




opie wrote on Jun 10, 2009 11:19 AM:

" See you, Celia! Wish I’d got to know you better. Please come back and visit several times a week. ----- Answer to question: You think we should force marriage on our cats? I haven’t tried that since I was a kid, and I don’t think they grasped it at all. "




celia wrote on Jun 10, 2009 6:31 AM:

" opie. Such pressure.....Here's the deal. Out of a need to have faith in humankind and for sanity sake, I have chosen to limit my time on blogs. They can be such a time sink! And, as someone pointed out,on this blog, I'm mostly arguing with old people set in their ways. My energies are much better spent in other ways.For a time, some comments got downright crazy, perhaps easier when hiding behind fake names.Whatever the reason, I prefer to direct my time and energy in a more possitive direction. I'll provoke thought in more productive ways. See ya! "




Answer to question wrote on Jun 9, 2009 11:33 PM:

" Here I am and I don't think "marriage equality" is an issue here in this valley as there are only about 150 people who think that marriage involves anyone but a man and a woman who want to get married. Of course, we have a very large "cat population" right now, and those darn felines don't bother to get married at all! Someone should see about correcting that for sure! "




opie wrote on Jun 9, 2009 1:05 PM:

" We’re all counting on you, Celia. Without your participation, I don’t think we’d ever hear from people like “thinker” or “Answer to question” or “straight not narrow”. Where do they go when you’re not around to spice things up? "




celia wrote on Jun 9, 2009 6:52 AM:

" Hello! While I'd love to keep things interesting, I'm just not sure what the happy medium is. Since I've never done drugs, shot or stabbed anyone, it's hard to comment on the local news. I did attend a huge gathering in Fresno for marriage equality. But I don't know if that is local enough. Time will tell and I'll look for oppertunities to spice things up and fight the boring.... "




Peg wrote on Jun 4, 2009 12:52 PM:

" Well, I don't what I've done to get such attention except share facts...... "




thinker wrote on Jun 3, 2009 5:12 PM:

" Yep....boring.....really when people can't talk about Gay marriage or religion, it's just not as exciting...face it, those subjects spice things up! Wait and see.... "




Answer to question wrote on May 28, 2009 5:34 PM:

" I don't think it will be dull around here if Celia and Peg keep writing....and then too....we always have the "infamous Al Steuart who is so willing and admired!" "




celia wrote on May 27, 2009 10:35 AM:

" Good points opie and thinker. I can see how this issue may be difficult for the Sun. While it's true that space is limited, the local news is pretty narrow. And I think it's good to expose readers to the bigger picture, real world ideas, that do affect our lives locally. But it get's crazy when people just ramble on in letters with no tangible point.Maybe there is a happy medium. In the mean time, I thank the Sun for their efforts both on paper and on line. "




opie wrote on May 27, 2009 9:55 AM:

" I’m with thinker. Already it’s kind of dull, compared to before. This is such a small area, it doesn’t seem good for us not to keep our eyes on the big picture, and talk about it. Those new lines on the boulevard just don’t stimulate me. "




to thinker wrote on May 27, 2009 7:55 AM:

" Only if you happen to think that community topics are boring! "




thinker wrote on May 27, 2009 5:22 AM:

" So does that mean we are going back to boring? "