Page 1 of 5
Posted on September 8 at 9:40 a.m.
Bill you should support this ban since it is not governmental regulation at all but rather the free market that imposed this ban. Or do you oppose free market bans as well????
On Can't buy smokes at CVS any more?
Posted on September 5 at 4:11 p.m.
Jarvis, Denise smeared no one.
She merely pointed out that all societies have some bias and that judges as part of society, have their own biases and that they simply need to be aware of them in their decision making.
There is simply no smear at all in that
Your continual focus on something that does not exist shows evidence of your own deficit and not any by Denise
On Big Changes on Bench
Posted on September 4 at 10:53 a.m.
My goodness JarvisJarvis you really seem to have a problem reading the printed words.
Denise said society has bias and we each have our own biases and so as well do all Judges.
None of us is or can be bias free as much as we might claim or hope otherwise
All Denise said was she tried to help others become aware of their bias
Posted on September 4 at 10:12 a.m.
JarvisJarvis if you reread it she says the bench reflects "the bias of society at large".
Do you deny that we have racial disparity in our society at large?
Do you deny kids of color are incarcerated at significantly higher rates than those without color?
What on earth are you really trying to say here other than you dont like Denise which you had previously made clear at the outset?
Posted on September 4 at 9:21 a.m.
No Botany she said nothing of the sort.
You read something that into the article which exposes more about your bias than anything else.
Posted on August 18 at 8:50 a.m.
The real disinformation campaign appears in places like this where nearly all of those who oppose Measure P refuse to even post using their actual names.
That speaks volumes about how proud they are of their remarks.
On Measure P Lawsuits Commence
Posted on August 14 at 10:24 a.m.
Nope Munny I did not acknowledge in the least that Measure P is intended to or ever would kill the oil industry and the recent action by the County Board of Supervisors directly and completely contradicts that false claim. I was responded to the false claims that preceded my comment and I certainly did not dismiss the impact of the oil industry economic impact but merely stated it was not nearly what was claimed. .
Can't you find some facts that are actually accurate to raise?
Posted on August 14 at 8:24 a.m.
IAW needs to disclose a few facts that fail to support his hypothesis and actually undermine his central argument.
The Oil industry comprises less than 0.1% of total Santa Barbara County workforce and only 1.64% of the entire county GDP
Thees levels are no where near what would be required to provide any sort of devastating impact as argued by IAW.
On the other hand, tourism agriculture and the wine industry, all sectors of our economy potentially adversely impacted by effects derived from from the oil industry, collectively comprise over 15% of the Santa Barbara County workforce and an order of magnitude greater share of the County GDP.
If we need to be careful to preserve an economic engine in Santa Barbara County, it certainly is not the oil industry we need to be concerned about.
Posted on July 30 at 4 p.m.
I believe the control tower at Santa Barbara Airport is taller than the Granada Building and may be taller than the new planned Chumash Tower and it is indeed inhabited at least during airport operations.
On Chumash Propose 12-Story Hotel Tower
Posted on July 7 at 1:14 p.m.
Audidriver needs to be counseled (certainly not counciled) on the vast differences between their and there
Maybe pursuing a degree in Feminist Studies might help to educate him on the difference.
On First UCSB PhD in Feminist Studies