Comments by albright1
Posted on October 23 at 8:28 a.m. (Suggest removal)
I was gonna start commenting "who writes this crap?" California is a basket case economically. But then I get to the end and the author is Froma Harrop. She is a basket case.
Posted on October 10 at 12:16 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Terry Amrhein.....how can an intelligent person like you be so dumb??;-(
Posted on September 8 at 5:08 p.m. (Suggest removal)
As the top law enforcement officer in the state, he was transporting a prostitute across state lines to engage in illegal activities. He was prosecuting people for the exact same behavior that he was engaged in himself. As governor of the state he utilized state police to gather information on his political enemies. Is there no level of criminal activity that democrats will not tolerate as long as it's their own criminal?
Posted on September 8 at 9:55 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Sarah Palin didn't have her private life open to public scrutiny by those who wanted to humiliate her? Are you kidding me? Davidson....you are a joke.
Posted on August 29 at 8:22 a.m. (Suggest removal)
my god....what has this world become?
Posted on August 22 at 9:27 a.m. (Suggest removal)
ChuckD...I have no dog in this fight. I see lousy, "expletive deleted" drivers every day that I ride. I could give you a detailed accounting of the most common dangers a rider faces when it comes to vehicles. But, rider safety can only be maximized by one person, the rider himself. Ed Lakata seems to have put himself in great danger by not wearing a helmet, not wearing high viz clothing, not using a mirror and not using lighting. That being said, it is very possible that Mr. Damphier is a bad driver and was at fault. Or maybe he is a bad driver but Ed swerved into him. The point is, we don't know and will never know.
I feel the Gazette is trying to give the impression that is was in fact Damphier's fault and that the Sheriff is somehow negligent for not recognizing this. They state that Damphier broke the law because he obviously did not pass at a safe distance from Lakata. Well, if Lakata swerved into the oncoming vehicle, he broke the law. He is required by law to maintain a straight line when being overtaken by a vehicle.
Listen, this accident has been a horrible experience for everyone involved. If we can get anything good out of it, it would be to heighten the awareness of as many people we can about the importance of safety when biking and/or driving in the proximity of bikes.
Posted on August 21 at 1:22 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Good editorial. I don't buy the under-staffing excuse though. There are twenty employees in the bureau. Let's say 16 of them do the work of following these issues. That would be 491/16 = 30 institutions per employee. That doesn't seem like it should be a problem.
Posted on August 21 at 11:25 a.m. (Suggest removal)
This editorial should be stricken from the paper and an apology issued to both the sheriff and Mr. Damphier. It reads like a journalistic vigilante conviction of manslaughter. I don't know who was at fault and neither do you. You mention a lot of circumstantial items about Damphier that have nothing to do with this particular accident. You don't mention some things about Ed Lakata (God bless him and his family and friends) that do in fact have bearing on this accident.
Mr. Lakata was a 55 year old (I'm 57 and an avid cyclist) climbing a monster hill on a Trek compact road bike. It is not unbelievable to assume that Ed veered into the traffic. I suspect he was not using a mirror and either turned to look at oncoming traffic, which has a natural tendency to make the cyclist veer to the left or he was simply wobbling because of the duress of the climb. One has to suspect that he was a novice cyclist. He had no helmet, no high viz or reflective clothing. I seriously doubt he was using a high intensity LED light on the rear. As a cyclist, we should all know that you can't count on the vehicles to keep a half lane away from you. You need to know when vehicles are oncoming (mirror), you need to be visible (clothing and lighting) and you need to travel straight when traffic is coming upon you.
If your point was to promote a law regarding drug and alcohol testing after an accident resulting in death or serious injury, you could have done that without the yellow journalism we see here in this editorial.
Posted on August 15 at 6:56 p.m. (Suggest removal)
The only reason that Washington is opposing the merger is that affects flights at Reagan Int'l. If they don't approve the merger, American goes out of business and you still have 4 major carriers. Duh!! I guess if the airlines agreed to grease the skids a little with some generous contributions to the politicians, they could get this done.
Posted on August 10 at 10:20 a.m. (Suggest removal)
You should have disclosed that a great deal of your income is based on grants of taxpayers money to further the myth of man-made global warming. You are not an unbiased source of opinion. Additionally, you present no case that warming is caused by human activities. You present no case that warming is bad for earth's inhabitants.